E Surty: Meeting of South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions
Union

3 August 2006

Chairperson,
Members of SAPTU,
Ladies and gentlemen:

At the outset, I wish to thank the President of the union for extending an
invitation to address this general meeting. I do not recall since the dawn of
our democracy, the last time a Minister of Education had an opportunity to
discuss matters of mutual interest with the membership of South African
Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union (SAPTU).

A week from today the country will be commemorating another historic
landmark in our history, the Women’s March of 1956. This march and the student
uprising of 1976 are some of the important, powerful catalysts that propelled
us towards freedom and democracy. Indeed, they provided a platform for the
transformation of our country.

As we are all aware the transformation agenda of higher education is
articulated in the White Paper three titled “A Programme for the Transformation
of Higher Education.” A key objective of this agenda is to plan and manage
higher education as a single co-ordinated higher education system.

For the benefit of those who have not read the White Paper, the policy
articulates the government’s vision for higher education as follows:

* to promote equity of access and fair chances of success to all who are
seeking to realise their potential through higher education, while eradicating
all forms of unfair discrimination and advancing redress for past
inequalities

* to meet through well-planned and co-ordinated teaching, learning and
research programmes, national development needs including the high-skilled
employment needs presented by a growing economy operating in a global
environment

* to support a democratic ethos and a culture of human rights by educational
programmes and practices conducive to critical discourse and creative thinking,
cultural tolerance and a common commitment to a humane, non-racist and
non-sexist social order

* to contribute to the advancement of all forms of knowledge and scholarship
and in particular address the diverse problems and demands of the local,
national, southern African and African contexts and uphold rigorous standards
of academic quality.

Observers outside the higher education system may assume that there are
simple strategies to achieve these goals and to instantaneously transform our
higher education system. We all know that it is a lot more challenging and
complex to achieve these objectives.

As stated in the National Plan for Higher Education (NPHE), government is
committed to increasing the participation rate in higher education. At the time
of approving the national plan, our target was a 20 percent participation rate
for the age cohort 20 - 24 years by 2010. As you are aware the system has grown
much faster than anticipated. However, this increase in participation has not
been matched by the concomitant increased investment in infrastructure and
human capacity and improvement in the success and throughput rates of
students.

In this regard, a great deal has been said about the instruments that the
Department of Education is using to manage the sustainable growth of the system
in particular enrolment planning.

The emphasis on planning is informed by the fact that if the higher
education system is to respond to the national development agenda in terms of
access, redress and human resource development needs, such as those outlined by
the Deputy President in Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South
Africa (AsgiSA). The size and shape of the system cannot be left to the
vagaries of the market in particular unco-ordinated institutional decisions on
student enrolments and programme offerings.

The NPHE therefore emphasises that the size and shape of the higher
education system must be determined in the context of the available resources,
if the quality and sustainability of the system is not to be compromised.

I trust SAPTU and its membership will actively engage with these issues both
at an institutional and national level and support the Minister’s efforts to
build quality in all of our Higher Education Institutions (HEIs).

The NPHE further identified as a key objective and goal of transformation,
the restructuring of the higher education landscape to transcend the
fragmentation, inequalities and inefficiencies of the apartheid past and to
enable the establishment of South African institutions consistent with the
vision and values of a non-racial, non-sexist and democratic society.

Many of you have been part of this mammoth project where different
institutions have come together as technikons and universities to form new
South African institutions reflective of the new non-racial and non-sexist and
democratic ethos.

As part of our response to the challenges of implementing this restructuring
project, the Department of Education established a merger unit to provide
technical and financial support to merged institutions. I am aware that some of
you may have been involved in engagements with the merger unit in your
institutions or nationally.

As a labour union, it is understandable that you would have a particular
interest in the impact of the mergers on the employment status and conditions
of your members.

I believe it is safe to say that most unions have put as one of the issues
for discussion during the mergers, the harmonisation and equalisation of
conditions of service and benefits of their members. In addition, there has
been an expectation that government should carry the cost associated with
equalising salaries and benefits.

It is the view of the Department that equalisation of staff salaries is not
a once off cost but an ongoing institutional cost and therefore institutions
have to manage the process in the context of financial affordability and
sustainability. In this regard of the nine mergers that have taken place since
January 2004 only five institutions have reached agreement on all matters,
seven institutions on conditions of service but not remuneration and only three
have not reached agreement on these matters as yet.

While this picture may not appear to be ideal, significant achievements have
been made despite the scale and difficulty of the problems.

Chairperson, there are some who may perceive unions as a burden that must be
borne in the process of managing organisations. However, in democratic society
participation by unions and other stakeholder organisations within institutions
that have legitimate constituencies is fundamental to developing institutions
that can truly boast collective responsibility for achieving set goals, real
buy-in and a genuine shared vision for the future.

Fortunately, although there may well be those who disagree the nature of
employee/employer relationship has moved along from the confrontational and
adversarial relationship of the past on both an institutional, sectoral and
national scale.

The Department of Education understands that on occasion the relationship
between unions and institutional management may take an adversarial nature.
However, all parties including unions must understand the importance of looking
for fairness in the context of ensuring the viability and sustainability of
institutions.

For this to happen we require a concerted effort by unions and other
stakeholders in changing the perception that stakeholders only play adversarial
and confrontational role rather than constructive engagement.

I have no doubt that SAPTU and its membership subscribes to these
principles.

In conclusion, I wish to briefly raise the issue of institutional
governance. As you are aware the Higher Education Act states that councils of
public higher education institutions must govern the institution.

In this context governance means amongst others determining policy, ensure
compliance to relevant legislation, promotion of ethics, efficiency and
effectiveness, monitoring the conduct of activities and the attainment of goals
and objectives.

In the true spirit of corporative governance, councils are composed of a
diverse range of stakeholders including union members. However, the members of
council are first and foremost the custodians of the institution and are
expected to act in the best interest of the institution and the higher
education system as a whole. In this regard, council members are expected to
fulfil their fiduciary, moral and ethical responsibilities in a judicious
manner. Council members serve on the council in their personal capacities and
should not act as representatives of any interest or lobby group, including
unions!

I am hoping therefore that you will as SAPTU engage with some of the issues
I have raised. I hope that you will have fruitful deliberations in the next two
days.

I wish you well in your deliberations.

I thank you!

Issued by: Department of Education
3 August 2006