the Portfolio Committee (PC) on Correctional Services in Cape Town
19 September 2006
Subject: PC report on their Eastern Cape visit
The department would like to express appreciation for the opportunity to
share information with the Portfolio Committee on developments in the Eastern
Cape (EC) region.
Honourable members of the Portfolio Committee will agree that such
interaction promotes mutual learning for both the members of the department and
the Portfolio Committee. It also presents an opportunity to clarify facts in
what may otherwise remain incorrect perceptions. Most of the presentations we
have been making to the Portfolio Committee this year bear testimony to this
fact.
The Regional Commissioner Eastern Cape will present a report that responds
to the specific set of issues raised in the report. My role is simply to
present an introduction for her report.
We have had the opportunity to peruse the report of the Portfolio
Committee's visit to the Eastern Cape and would like to thank members of this
committee for the work they did over the week they spent in the province. The
report is very extensive and it demonstrates the commitment by honourable
members of the committee to contribute to the resolution of some of the
challenges that confront the department.
The report contains many observations on which we concur with the Portfolio
Committee. These include the twin problems of awaiting trial detainees and
overcrowding, the commitment to fight corruption, the imposition of harsh
sentences for relatively minor offences and the difficulties in retaining
scarce skills as well as the conditions of employment of our employees.
Unfortunately, while we share many of the observations of the members of the
Portfolio Committee, there is a combination of factors which, even with the
best of intentions, make it difficult or in a few instances, quite impossible
for us to implement all the recommendations made by the committee. Examples of
these factors are the following:
* The department is governed by national policies and legislation which
standardise how it should conduct its business. In this regard for instance, it
is not within our power to introduce measures to retain scarce skills. Policy
would also not allow us to involve the Portfolio Committee in recruitment
processes.
* Some of the recommendations in their nature require a multi year
implementation plan. Examples of this include the conclusion of the seven day
working week, recruitment to create the requisite capacity management of
overcrowding and ongoing negotiations with the judiciary to implement
alternative sentencing.
We have also noted that a number of recommendations deal with issues that
the department is already dealing with on its own or as part of the cluster.
Examples include: filling of vacancies, a national plan to reduce the number of
escapes, interaction with other stakeholders to remove children from
correctional centres as well as the Cabinet project of producing a new,
innovative solution to the problem of awaiting trial detention as well as the
adoption of an Integrated Human Resource Strategy.
Members of the Portfolio Committee have already observed that in many
instances, there is an information gap between what members know and the status
quo on those matters. It has already been suggested that there may be a need
for an intensive information session between the honourable members and
management. I also believe that such an information session is necessary and
have already instructed my managers to liaise with the secretariat of the
committee to find a suitable date for a two-day workshop in which the
department shall update the committee on a range of issues. Such a workshop can
be held towards the end of October to ensure that it takes the form of a
mid-term performance review.
The most unfortunate factor about the observations and recommendations of
the Portfolio Committee is that some of them are based on information received
from inmates or officials which is either incorrect or inaccurate. Examples of
this include the alleged situation where one person acts in three positions,
placement of people far from their home towns (when in fact, as a result of
desperation, people apply for jobs fully aware that their placement will be
very far from their homes), the impression created that there are no promotion
opportunities in the department and reported lack of management intervention in
Middledrift.
Our experience from visiting management areas is that in many instances,
some individuals will distort information or refuse to accept policy
developments or management interventions in they are not in their favour. Such
individuals will use opportunities such as the visits by the Portfolio
Committee to extract sympathy, often at the expense of the truth. There is of
course the worse case scenario where people will project the department as a
failure in order to advance their own agendas.
Notwithstanding all these factors, I would like to emphasise that it is
certainly not our impression that the majority of our officials set out to
mislead the Portfolio Committee. Indeed some of them may truly be unaware of
these developments as a result of some blockages in communication. This matter
is addressed in the committee's recommendations and the department is
addressing it. Already, as will be seen in the Regional Commissioner's report,
she has started a process of quarterly roads shows in which she visits all
management areas in the region to update members.
I would also like to assure the honourable members of this committee that
contrary to the impression that may have been created; the department has
ongoing processes and concrete plans to address the challenges faced by the
Eastern Cape.
These include the appointment of a Regional Commissioner in January this
year. following the long drawn-out legal action taken by the erstwhile Regional
Commissioner Mr R Mataka after his dismissal. This has been complimented by the
appointment of a Deputy Regional Commissioner last month. After a thorough
analysis of the operational requirements of the department in the Eastern Cape
and the Eastern Cape region, we have affected transfers and redeployment of
many of the senior managers in the region.
We would like to concur with the observation of the Portfolio Committee that
Middledrift is indeed one of the major challenges facing the department in the
Eastern Cape. On the other hand, we believe that it is always necessary to
explain the context of the Middledrift environment.
The correctional centre was the biggest security facility during the reign
of the homeland administration. This has left it with a negative legacy and
institutional culture that we are certainly turning around.
It is now common knowledge that the centre has for a very long time been
used as a power base for individuals and groups which, for reasons that may
have been related to their agendas, embarked on actions that had the effect of
undermining the programmes of the department. This agenda manifested in various
forms which included collusion with inmates to break the law, non-productivity
at work, industrial action and a general tendency to refuse to be bound by
progressive agreements between management and labour.
We are confident that the interventions currently under way in Middledrift
will, once and for all, resolve many of these problems.
Earlier this year, I also appointed a National Task Team to conduct a
thorough analysis of the changes that need to be put in place at the
correctional centre and submit recommendations to management for
implementation. The terms of reference of the Task Team include the
consideration of the classification of the centre, audit and costing of the
security equipment needed, determination of its staff complement and
suggestions on the extent of capital projects that need to be embarked on.
I have observed with pleasure that some of the recommendations of the
Portfolio Committee are similar to the proposals being considered by the Task
Team.
I am also confident that unlike previously, factors such as the resolve of
the leadership at the Regional office, the diligence and management abilities
of the Acting Correctional Centre Manager (who we must place on record that he
is one of the department's best managers in the region, as opposed to the
unfortunate and false statements that have been made about him in the media) as
well as co-ordination with head office will combine to deliver the required
results on Middledrift.
I would like to conclude by making a special plea on behalf of our managers
at Head Office and correctional centres across the country that while we
recognise, respect and appreciate the oversight role performed by the Portfolio
Committee, we respect that whenever necessary, members be guarded about some of
the statements and policy pronouncements they make during their visits to the
centres. We realise fully that it is not our place to tell elected
representatives what to say but we hope that by the same token, members will
realise that they are duly held in high esteem by members and inmates and
therefore any statement they make, whether it is based on a stated intention or
a reflection of government policy, may be taken as fait accompli by those who
hear it.
Members will appreciate that we have just emerged from an unfortunate
history where there was a serious contestation of authority between management
and labour in most of our centres. This left the department with an indecisive
and vulnerable management echelon, a situation which I am proud to say we have
slowly but certainly managed to reverse. It becomes very sad and unfortunate
then, when policy and procedural decisions taken by these managers are unjustly
questioned and criticised by elected representatives, sometimes on the basis of
information received from people who for their own reasons, had been opposed to
them in the first place.
Thank you
Issued by: Department of Correctional Services
19 September 2006
Source: Department of Correctional Services (http://www.dcs.gov.za)
