Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Background
Chapter 2: The Legislative Framework of Service Delivery in the Public Administration 21
Chapter 3: Reports on Service Delivery
Chapter 4: The Responses of the Directors-General
Chapter 5: International Experience
Chapter 7: The Provisions of the Constitution and the Public Service Act, 1994, regarding Accountability for Proper Service Delivery in the Public Administration
Chapter 8: Key Findings and Recommendations
Preface
The public sector is by its very nature always the subject of much criticism, whether justified or not. One of the justifiable reasons for complaining about the public administration is, in some respects, a failure to provide services of an acceptable standard. Communication plays a vital role in the provision of every such service.
It is not the aim of this report to criticize, but rather to identify the causes of delays in communication within the public administration and to recommend corrective and preventative actions that can be taken.
Improving public service delivery is not a short-term exercise, neither can it be a once only process. It should be a continuous way of life for every public servant, even though progress might sometimes be frustratingly slow. It is hoped that the contents of this report will go some way in assisting those who are responsible for making it happen. Improved service delivery in the public administration would, after all, mean a better quality of life for all South Africans.
Madam Speaker and Honourable Members of Parliament
I have the honour to submit a special report in terms of Section 8(2)(b)(i) of the Public Protector Act, 1994 on an investigation into the causes of delays in communication in the public administration.
Adv S A M Baqwa, SC
Public Protector
10 June 2002
[ Top ]
Executive summary
This report deals with an investigation conducted by the office of the Public Protector into the causes for delays in the public administration. The investigation was initiated because of a complaint by the Minister of Education and the experiences of the office of the Public Protector in connection with delays in the public administration.
The investigation comprised:
An evaluation of information obtained from the Directors-General of government departments and the provincial administrations;
Consideration of a number of reports on investigations into performance delivery in the public service by several institutions, such as the Public Service Commission, the Department of Public Service and Administration and the Presidential Review Commission;
A study of the legislative framework pertaining to service delivery in the public service; and
Consideration of international experience in connection with improving service delivery in the public administration.
The key findings made from the investigation are the following:
The Public Protector has recommended that:
1. Directors-General and other Heads of Departments and government agencies take urgent steps to ensure that the following measures have been or are in the process of being implemented:
1.1 The modern technology that is available should be utilized. E-mail facilities will allow supervisors to make changes to drafts of correspondence, reports, etc themselves. This will save time, as the draft would then just be forwarded without returning it to the original author for corrections, retyping, etc.
1.2 Departments should adhere to the Batho Pele Principles.
1.3 All departments should develop and publish their service standards, including standards for responding to correspondence. This will enable the public to hold departments to these standards, using them as a yardstick to measure performance.
1.4 A proper system of performance management should have defined standards for performance, but should also recognize and address capacity/training needs.
1.5 Decision making should take place at lower levels. The culture of strong hierarchies and high level of decision making should change. These changes should however, be accompanied by responsibility and accountability and a suitable support and control system.
1.6 Capacity should be enhanced at management level.
1.7 The procedures of communication should be shortened. Every department should clearly define its core business and work accordingly.
1.8 Management should be trained in leadership.
1.9 Public servants should be trained to be aware of their responsibilities.
1.10 There should be a complaints office within every department.
1.11 Performance assessment should be done against responsiveness to public enquiries and more time should be spent on service delivery.
1.12 Senior staff/supervisors should be seen to be leading by example, as it will positively influence subordinates.
1.13 Training courses should be conducted at all levels within departments to explain general sound administrative principles.
1.14 Staff should be motivated to direct their focus at proper service delivery. Performance agreements should contain targets for responses in order to ensure that the turn around time is improved.
1.15 More realistic target dates should be set by national departments for responses by provincial departments.
1.16 A comprehensive communication campaign should be launched by governments to inform the public of the different spheres of government and the jurisdiction and responsibility of each.
1.17 A one-stop facility, which should include a 24-hour call centre designed to assist the public with complaints and enquiries should be established.
2. Ministers, Members of Executive Councils, Directors-General of national government departments and provincial administrations take urgent steps to:
2.1 Determine whether the shortcomings in connection with effective and efficient communication and other aspects of service delivery referred to in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report, have been adequately addressed in their respective departments or administrations;
2.2 Introduce urgent measures to address the cause of the problem and to prevent a recurrence, where shortcomings still exist;
2.3 Ensure proper compliance by employees with the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Public Servants and implement disciplinary measures where failure of such compliance occurs;
2.4 Fully implement the principles contained in the Batho Pele White Paper;
2.5 Report to Parliament or the Provincial Legislatures, as the case may be, on an annual basis, on the progress made by their departments or administrations in improving the standards of service delivery and implementing the Batho Pele policy.
3. The Public Service Commission:
3.1 By virtue of the provisions of section 196 of the Constitution, 1996, continue to monitor and evaluate the performance of the public service as far as service delivery and specifically the implementation of the Batho Pele policy is concerned; and
3.2 Report on their findings with reference to specific departments or administrations, to Parliament on a regular basis.
4. The Portfolio Committees of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures:
4.1 Require from the political and administrative heads of departments and administrations to report to the Committees on, at least, an annual basis, on the progress that has been made by their departments or administrations in improving the standards of service delivery and implementing the Batho Pele policy.
4.2 Summon heads of departments and administrations to appear before the Committees whenever it appears, from reports by the Public Service Commission or otherwise, that a department or administration is failing in its obligation to provide a proper service, and to call them to account; and
4.3 Report to the National Assembly or the Provincial Legislature, as the case may be on the findings and recommendations of the Committee on these issues.
5. The Speaker of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures, as the case may be, refer all reports submitted to the National Assembly, as referred to in paragraph 4.2 above, to the relevant Portfolio Committees, in terms of the Rules of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures.
[ Top ]
1. Background
1.1 Introduction
This report is submitted to the National Assembly, the National Council of Provinces, the Provincial Legislatures, the Minister of Public Service and Administration and the Chairperson of the Public Service Commission by virtue of the provisions of section 182(1)(b) of the Constitution, 1996 and sections 8(1) and 8(2)(b)(i) of the Public Protector Act, 1994. It deals with an investigation into the causes of delays in communication within the public administration.
1.2 The complaint
1.2.1 I was approached by Prof K Asmal, MP, the Minister of Education, in connection with his concerns about the delays that occur in the communication between members of the public and government departments and ministries. In his letter to me Prof Asmal stated that: "I feel that, in the interests of sound administration, indeed of combating what could be said to amount to maladministration, it would be worthwhile making a ruling into the matter, as a matter of general principle."
1.2.2 The issue raised by Prof Asmal has been a matter of serious concern to me for quite some time. My office has been experiencing difficulties with delays in communication with some government agencies and ministries ever since its inception. Such delays not only frustrate the investigation of complaints, but also prevent my office from rendering as efficient a service to the public as we are constitutionally obliged to do.
Consequently, I decided to conduct an investigation to establish the causes of delays in the communication between government agencies and between government agencies and the public, with a view to considering what can be done to effectively address this matter.
1.3 The powers and functions of the Public Protector
1.3.1 The office of the Public Protector is an institution established in terms of the provisions of Chapter 9 of the Constitution, 1996. Section 182(1)(a) of the Constitution provides that:
" The Public Protector has the power, as regulated by national legislation to investigate any conduct in state affairs, or in the public administration in any sphere of government, that is alleged or suspected to be improper or to result in any impropriety or prejudice".
1.3.2 Section 6(4) of the Public Protector Act, 1994, provides that the Public Protector has the power to investigate, on his or her own initiative or on receipt of a complaint, any alleged abuse or unjustifiable exercise of power or unfair, capricious, discourteous or other improper conduct or undue delay by a person performing a public function. It also provides that the Public Protector shall be competent, at any time prior to, during or after an investigation, if he or she deems it advisable, to refer any matter which has a bearing on an investigation to the appropriate body or authority affected by it or to make an appropriate recommendation regarding the redress of the prejudice resulting therefrom or to make any other appropriate recommendation he or she deems expedient to the affected public body or authority.
1.3.3 Once the Public Protector has concluded his/her investigation, he/she has to report on the conduct found and has to take appropriate remedial action.
1.3.4 Ultimately, it is the function of the Public Protector to assist government at all levels to establish and maintain fair, proper and efficient public administration.
1.4 The investigation
1.4.1 The investigation was conducted in terms of the provisions of section 7 of the Public Protector Act, 1994.
1.4.2 I approached all the Directors-General of the national government departments and the provincial administrations in writing in order to obtain their views on the causes of delays in their respective departments. In my approach, I stated my concerns as follows:
[ Top ]
2. The legislative framework of service deliveryin the public administration
[ Top ]
3. Reports on service delivery
[ Top ]
4. The responses of the directors-general
4.1 The causes of delays
In their responses to my letter, referred to in Chapter 1 above, the Directors-General identified the following as causes of delays in communication in the public service:
4.1.1 In many cases delays are caused by a systemic problem rather than by any specific factor. In this regard, the typical route for correspondence in a government agency is described as follows:
A letter addressed to a department is received by a department's registry where it is opened, registered and then routed. A messenger collects the letter from the registry and takes it to the indicated recipient. The recipient, for example, a Director of a component, will study the letter and refer it to a subordinate for the drafting of a response. He/she will, amongst other tasks, and in terms of priority, draft a response. The response will then be submitted to the Director who will assess and improve (if necessary) the draft response. On completion of the improvements and corrections, the draft letter will be forwarded to the Chief Director, Deputy Director-General, Director-General and eventually the Minister for approval and signature.
In the above scenario delays can occur in respect of the following:
4.1.1.1 The time it takes for the letter to get from the registry to the Director;
4.1.1.2 The time it takes before the Director can attend to the matter;
4.1.1.3 The time it takes before the subordinate can attend to the letter;
4.1.1.4 The time it takes before the letter reaches the Minister; and
4.1.1.5 The time it takes before the Minister can attend to the matter.
The following questions arise in connection with the above scenario:
- How effective is the registry system to ensure that the letter reaches the Director without delay?
- Do delegations exist in the department that enable the Director or even his/her subordinates to finalize the matter?
- Is it really necessary for every manager in the chain of command to consider and approve the response?
- Is the draft response routed electronically, on paper or by hand?
4.1.2 Sometimes the Director-General and the Minister may find themselves in Pretoria or Cape Town, respectively, as a result of Parliamentary sessions, which causes a delay in communication.
4.1.3 Communication between the Director-General and the regional offices of the department may be necessary in order to compile the response. The long distances and poor infrastructure of regional offices is often the cause of delays.
4.1.4 Members of the public and even government agencies are ill informed about the functions and jurisdiction of government departments. This causes them to approach the wrong department with their enquiries. For example, a matter relating to a provincial department of education is referred to the national department. Referral to the province concerned then causes unnecessary delay.
4.1.5 Some of the matters that have to be responded to require in depth research, which causes a delay in the eventual response to the complainant.
4.1.6 The information required is not immediately available, the person dealing with it might not be available or the information required is of a confidential nature and needs someone's approval before it can be made available.
4.1.7 The attitude of public servants, not having a sense of urgency when dealing with the public.
4.1.8 A lack of "openness" in the public service and the secretive attitude of some officials lead to a lack of responsiveness.
4.1.9 A lack of will and commitment on the part of some public servants to do their work on time.
4.1.10 Public servants are ignorant of their Constitutional responsibilities to ensure access to information by the public.
4.1.11 A lack of capacity in departments, poor registries, record management and supervision.
4.1.12 A lack of financial and personnel resources.
4.1.13 Lack of knowledge on the part of the public of the legislation governing the actions of departments, in some cases, causes fruitless appeals and re-appeals to be lodged that lead to duplication in that the same tasks have to be repeated.
4.1.14 Delays in connection with enquiries by a member of the public addressed to a Minister often occur due to the fact that the Minister requires the department, mostly the Director-General `s office to investigate the complaint. This takes time, as the Director-General must ensure that the information provided to the Minister for his/her response is factually correct. Ministers also often delay the response by not attending to draft responses timeously. In many cases the matter referred to the Minister is of a trivial nature. However, simply because it was addressed to the Minister's office, it ends up receiving more attention than it deserves, to the detriment of more important and urgent matters.
4.1.15 It was also stated that the member of the public who is making enquiries from the department causes some of the subsequent delay by providing inadequate and sometimes incorrect information. Additional information then has to be obtained before a decision can be taken.
4.1.16 Ministers may sometimes also, although with the best of intentions, encourage voluminous correspondence and create expectations that increase the workload of the staff of the department without having considered the capacity of the department to deal with the matter concerned.
4.1.17 The exodus of trained and experienced staff in the public service over the past years and the considerable inflow of new employees who do not have the full background knowledge, training and experience to deal with the tasks at hand as well as the focus on greater accountability that came about as a result of our new democracy, have a substantial effect on the delays that occur in respect of the decision making process.
4.1.18 The deterioration of complaint handling mechanisms, as procedures in this regard were often not documented and new incumbents had to find their own way when dealing with complaints, enquiries, etc.
4.1.19 Employees' lack of knowledge of and/or their failure to adhere to the applicable prescripts such as the Public Service Regulations, the Code of Conduct for Public Servants, etc.
4.1.20 Lack of diligence and commitment to service delivery on the part of employees.
4.1.21 Lack of clear and unambiguous job descriptions that would enable the supervisor or manager to identify which employee is responsible for the performance of a specific function and thus the delay thereof.
4.1.22 Lack of control over feedback in respect of enquiries.
4.1.23 Lack of proper follow-up systems in order to identify the officials responsible for delays.
4.1.24 Lack of proper and up to date incoming and outgoing documentation registers.
4.1.25 Absence of clear, written delegations and assignments of functions and responsibilities.
4.1.26 Lack of diligent managerial oversight and control.
4.1.27 In some cases complainants imply that legal action is envisaged against a department. This causes a delay in the response, as legal opinion is often required before a response is provided.
4.1.28 Some departments do not have qualified personnel in certain disciplines and as consultants have to be appointed to attend to certain matters (such as engineers) delays are caused.
4.1.29 It is often necessary to consult with different parties to enable a department to provide a proper response to the person making enquiries. This consultative process obviously causes delays in the eventual response.
4.1.30 Lack of proper information technology facilities and trained staff to operate the facilities that are available is another cause of delays.
4.1.31 Complainants or persons making enquiries often have unrealistic deadlines. The word "urgent" loses its meaning because everything becomes urgent.
4.1.32 Lack of discipline and under performance by staff members are also areas of great concern.
4.1.33 Internal communication between departments is poor, because departments tend to operate as separate entities.
4.1.34 Unjustified absenteeism and sick leave put the remaining staff under pressure to do more work with fewer hands.
4.1.35 Budgetary constraints have a negative influence on the level and quality of services rendered to the public.
4.1.36 Service standards have not been established to provide a specific level and quality of service to customers.
4.1.37 Labour relations issues, such as grievances of staff and conflict between supervisor and subordinates often have an influence on the speed with which enquiries and complaints are attended to.
4.1.38 The proliferation of new legislation over recent years has necessitated that staff be trained. Even so, it may take some time before they are fully conversant with the provisions applicable to their work environment.
4.1.39 In service training of new staff takes up a lot of production time.
4.1.40 Requests for information from both the public and other government departments are on the increase.
4.1.41 Incompleteness of documentation from the original source or from those commenting has a direct influence on the speed of finalizing replies.
4.1.42 Lack of clearly defined roles. This causes disagreement as to who should attend to a matter. The matter is sent from pillar to post because of this uncertainty.
4.1.43 Imbalances in the allocation of work leading to situations where certain officials simply have too much to do and cannot meet deadlines while there are other officials who are not fully engaged.
4.1.44 Poor time management.
4.1.45 As far as communication with constitutional institutions, such as the office of the Public Protector is concerned, officials are not always fully conversant with their powers, functions and jurisdiction.
4.1.46 The absence of a computerised correspondence tracking system makes it difficult to monitor the progress of correspondence.
4.1.47 The skills level of officials in drafting appropriate responses is also a cause of delays.
4.2 Measures taken
According to the responses of the Directors-General, the following are examples of measures that have been taken to address the causes of delays:
4.2.1 Some departments have set certain standards for interaction with the public. A response time of 10 days has been introduced. It has however proved to be insufficient and standards will have to be reviewed.
4.2.2 A system whereby an acknowledgement of receipt is sent to the person making enquiries within three days of receiving the letter concerned has also been introduced by certain departments. A response is sent within 30 days, even if it only amounts to a progress report.
4.2.3 The possibility of establishing a one-stop shop to respond to public enquiries is also under consideration by certain government agencies.
4.2.4 Measures have been introduced in the performance contracts of employees to ensure that response times to enquiries will be assessed and measured. A Service Standards Policy document that will, once approved, address response times has also been drafted.
4.2.5 Officials are being encouraged to take the initiative to establish priority issues and to act upon them without waiting for a messenger, for example, to bring files to them.
4.2.6 There is also the clear intention amongst some departments to train staff on professionalism and work ethics and the Code of Conduct for Public Servants.
4.2.7 The Office of the Public Service Commission has drafted a Service Delivery Improvement Plan for its own services.
4.2.8 The Public Service Commission is involved in monitoring the implementation of the Batho Pele principles. They appear to have some difficulty in this regard because there are no measurement instruments, which make it problematic to objectively assess improvements over time.
4.2.9 The Eastern Cape Provincial Government has run campaigns aimed at introducing the Batho Pele campaign. Departments have been directed to continue with departmental transformation plans. The following have also been attended to:
4.2.9.1 Training on the Code of Conduct;
4.2.9.2 Enforcing of the Disciplinary Code;
4.2.9.3 Emphasis on the importance of constitutional institutions;
4.2.9.4 Training on record management;
4.2.9.5 Personal Assistants have been appointed for Heads of departments to assist with responses;
4.2.9.6 Personnel files have been updated;
4.2.9.7 One-stop service centres were established in provincial districts to prevent clogging up of head office; and
4.2.9.8 The multiple levels of communication have been reduced by doing away with regional offices and by maintaining only district and provincial offices.
4.2.10 Some departments have entered into discussions with SITA to address the lack of speed of the Wide Area Network of the public administration.
4.2.11 An electronic file management system has been introduced to ensure prompt replies to correspondence.
4.2.12 Managers in departments have been instructed not to delay files in their offices for more than 48 hours unless the matter concerned needs further research or is complex.
4.2.13 Some departments have done away with a strict hierarchical system in favour of a combination of limited hierarchy and a flat structure.
4.2.14 The North West Province has introduced a Service Delivery Charter in an attempt to underline the Batho Pele principles of improved standards. These principles have also been included in the performance agreements of senior managers.
4.2.15 The Free State Provincial Government has done the following:
4.2.15.1 A Provincial Strategic Plan was developed;
4.2.15.2 All provincial departments have developed and implemented Service Delivery Improvement Plans;
4.2.15.3 A provincial customer care strategy was developed to manage poor services rendered by staff and to address complaints lodged by customers;
4.2.15.4 Each department developed and is in the process of implementing an Operational Customer Care Plan that will monitor, review and evaluate customer care;
4.2.15.5 A Corporate Communication Policy was developed;
4.2.15.6 Labour relations forums have been established in all departments to address burning issues and to speed up management of grievances;
4.2.15.7 All departments have new filing systems to ensure smooth handling and safe capture of documents;
4.2.15.8 The Code of Conduct for Public Servants has been implemented;
4.2.15.9 A Customer Care Training Course was developed;
4.2.15.10 A new Performance Management System was developed to improve the overall performance of staff;
4.2.15.11 Consideration is given to the possibility of implementing alternative service delivery methods and to outsource non-core functions like cleaning, laundry and gardening services in an attempt to speed up delivery; and
4.2.15.12 Toll free numbers have been introduced to address poor service and performance of staff.
4.2.16 Some departments have taken steps to familiarize their staff with the prescripts applicable to the public service in order to minimize delays. They have also introduced a rationalization process aimed at streamlining service delivery by cutting duplications, overlapping and piece-meal approaches and tendencies.
4.2.17 A training needs analysis and skills audit has been conducted with a view to providing appropriate training for employees. Some departments also prioritized posts, which needed to be filled, based on the need and availability of funds without compromising the quality of services.
4.2.18 Mechanisms in the form of an information database and the Intranet to provide enough resources for all employees at all times have also been introduced.
4.3 CONCLUSIONS
4.3.1 According to the Directors-General that co-operated in the investigation, the following appear to be key reasons for delays in communication:
4.3.1.1 Systemic problems in connection with the typical route followed by correspondence;
4.3.1.2 A lack of public awareness regarding the powers and functions of the different departments and levels of government;
4.3.1.3 A lack of knowledge, skills, experience, commitment and discipline on the part of public servants in key positions;
4.3.1.4 A lack of financial and personnel resources;
4.3.1.5 A lack of proper complaints handling mechanisms in departments;
4.3.1.6 A lack of sufficient delegations to speed up the process of responding to enquiries;
4.3.1.7 A lack of sufficient information technology facilities and trained staff to operate the systems that do exist; and
4.3.1.8 A general failure by departments to implement the Batho Pele principles effectively;
4.3.2 Several national departments and provincial governments have introduced measures to address the issue of delays in communication and poor service delivery in general. On the face of it, these measures appear to have the potential of addressing many of the causes of delays identified by the Directors-General.
4.3.3 The Directors-General generally agree that much can still be done to improve the shortcomings in respect of delays and that one of the most important matters that should be addressed in this regard is the effective implementation of the Batho Pele policy.
[ Top ]
5. International experience
5.1 As part of the investigation conducted by my office, we approached the offices of several Ombudsmän in other countries with a view to obtaining some international perspective on the matter.
5.2 In his response, Mr J Wood, the former Deputy Commonwealth Ombudsman of Australia, made the following remarks:
"The problem faced by the Public Protector in South Africa is probably familiar to all public sector Ombudsmen. In Australia, we have a fairly comprehensive complaints management system, which enabled us to monitor the performance of various government agencies. If we found a major pattern of defective administration, such as delay, we would instigate an own-motion investigation of the systemic causes of the problem."
According to Mr Wood, the Commonwealth Ombudsman has found the following to be some of the major causes for delays in the public administration:
- Lack of understanding of the principles of client service and lack of training of staff in client service delivery;
- Lack of record tracking or management systems in government agencies;
- Lack of obligated public accountability of public servants; and
- Lack of leadership in government agencies with regard to client service.
- The Ombudsman addressed these problems by assisting government agencies in developing proper complaints handling mechanisms and charters consisting of proper customer service principles.
5.3 Sir Brian Elwood, the Chief Ombudsman of New Zealand and the President of the International Ombudsman Institute reported that:
"Overall the standard of administration within the New Zealand Public Sector is satisfactory and the departments are generally conscious of their need to deal promptly with citizen enquiries and complaints. This satisfactory state of affairs has resulted from many years of persistent wearing away at the problem of unreasonable delay by successive Ombudsmen since our Office was first established in 1962."
5.4 Referring specifically to requests for information, Sir Brian indicated that ministers' offices in New Zealand have established computer-based enquiry tracking systems to facilitate better response times.
5.5 From the responses received from other Ombudsman offices, it is clear that a guide or standard of best practice for public servants is a generally accepted manner of addressing the issue of delays.
[ Top ]
6. The role of the Public Service Commission
6.1 The provisions of the Constitution, 1996
[ Top ]
7. The provisions of the Constitution and the Public Service Act, 1994, regarding accountability for proper service delivery in the public administration
[ Top ]
8. Key findings and recommendations
From the investigation discussed in the preceding chapters of this report, the following key findings and recommendations are made:
8.1 Key findings
8.1.12 The ultimate responsibility for effective and efficient service delivery in the public administration is that of Parliament and the Provincial Legislatures.
8.1.13 Enforcing accountability of those responsible by Parliament and the Provincial Legislatures is, in my view, primarily in the domain of those structures to effectively address the issue of improving service delivery in the public administration on a continuous and permanent basis. Institutions such as the office of the Public Protector play a support role and can assist Parliament in ensuring that the accountability principle is properly observed within the public sector.
8.2 Recommendations
In terms of the provisions of section 182(1)(c) of the Constitution, 1996, and section 6(4)(c)(ii) of the Public Protector Act, 1994, I recommend that:
8.2.1 Directors-General and other Heads of Departments and government agencies take urgent steps to ensure that the following measures have been or are in the process of being implemented:
8.2.1.1 The modern technology that is available should be utilized. E-mail facilities will allow supervisors to make changes to drafts of correspondence, reports, etc themselves. This will save time, as the draft would then just be forwarded without returning it to the original author for corrections, retyping, etc.
8.2.1.2 Departments should adhere to the Batho Pele Principles.
8.2.1.3 All departments should develop and publish their service standards, including standards for responding to correspondence. This will enable the public to hold departments to these standards, using them as a yardstick to measure performance.
8.2.1.4 A proper system of performance management should have defined standards for performance, but should also recognize and address capacity/training needs.
8.2.1.5 Decision making should take place at lower levels. The culture of strong hierarchies and high level of decision making should change. These changes should however, be accompanied by responsibility and accountability and a suitable support and control system.
8.2.1.6 Capacity should be enhanced at management level.
8.2.1.7 The procedures of communication should be shortened. Every department should clearly define its core business and work accordingly.
8.2.1.8 Management should be trained in leadership.
8.2.1.9 Public servants should be trained to be aware of their responsibilities.
8.2.1.10 There should be a complaints office within every department.
8.2.1.11 Performance assessment should be done against responsiveness to public enquiries and more time should be spent on service delivery.
8.2.1.12 Senior staff/supervisors should be seen to be leading by example, as it will positively influence subordinates.
8.2.1.13 Training courses should be conducted at all levels within departments to explain general sound administrative principles.
8.2.1.14 Staff should be motivated to direct their focus at proper service delivery. Performance agreements should contain targets for responses in order to ensure that the turn around time is improved.
8.2.1.15 More realistic target dates should be set by national departments for responses by provincial departments.
8.2.1.16 A comprehensive communication campaign should be launched by governments to inform the public of the different spheres of government and the jurisdiction and responsibility of each.
8.2.1.17 A one-stop facility, which should include a 24-hour call centre designed to assist the public with complaints and enquiries should be established.
8.2.2 Ministers, Members of Executive Councils, Directors-General of national government departments and provincial administrations take urgent steps to:
8.2.2.1 Determine whether the shortcomings in connection with effective and efficient communication and other aspects of service delivery referred to in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report, have been adequately addressed in their respective departments or administrations;
8.2.2.2 Introduce urgent measures to address the cause of the problem and to prevent a recurrence, where shortcomings still exist;
8.2.2.3 Ensure proper compliance by employees with the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Public Servants and implement disciplinary measures where failure of such compliance occurs;
8.2.2.4 Fully implement the principles contained in the Batho Pele White Paper;
8.2.2.5 Report to Parliament or the Provincial Legislatures, as the case may be, on an annual basis, on the progress made by their departments or administrations in improving the standards of service delivery and implementing the Batho Pele policy.
8.2.3 The Public Service Commission:
8.2.3.1 By virtue of the provisions of section 196 of the Constitution, 1996, continue to monitor and evaluate the performance of the public service as far as service delivery and specifically the implementation of the Batho Pele policy is concerned; and
8.2.3.2 Report on their findings with reference to specific departments or administrations, to Parliament on a regular basis.
8.2.4 The Portfolio Committees of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures:
8.2.4.1 Require from the political and administrative heads of departments and administrations to report to the Committees on, at least, an annual basis, on the progress that has been made by their departments or administrations in improving the standards of service delivery and implementing the Batho Pele policy.
8.2.4.2 Summon heads of departments and administrations to appear before the Committees whenever it appears, from reports by the Public Service Commission or otherwise, that a department or administration is failing in its obligation to provide a proper service, and to call them to account; and
8.2.4.3 Report to the National Assembly or the Provincial Legislature, as the case may be on the findings and recommendations of the Committee on these issues.
8.2.5 The Speaker of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures, as the case may be, refer all reports submitted to the National Assembly, as referred to in paragraph 8.2.4.2 above, to the relevant Portfolio Committees, in terms of the Rules of the National Assembly and the Provincial Legislatures.
[ Top ]
Conclusion
Proper, efficient and effective communication is, as I have indicated above, the cornerstone of efficient service delivery in the public administration. It is, in my view, in its simplest form where the difference can be made, for example, the number of times a telephone is to ring before it is answered, the time within which correspondence received is responded to, the manner in which the public is addressed and attended to and the efforts that are made to improve relations between government agencies.
Addressing these basic, but fundamental, issues, from the highest to the lowest levels of the public administration, in a regulated and disciplined manner and motivating all employees of the public sector to have a change of attitude in regard to efficiency in communication, should result in a substantial improvement in addressing the service delivery shortcomings that I have referred to in this Report.
It is the responsibility of every employee of the public sector to ensure that he/she shows commitment towards improving communication in his/her department, to address bad attitudes of others in this regard and to co-operate with diligence and initiative to enhance the quality and the quantity of the services that they provide. Only if we all put our collective shoulder to the wheel, shall we be able to ensure that those who are dependent on public structures for a better quality of life in fact receive what they are entitled to in our free and democratic society.
[ Top ]
