Investigation Reports
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.
INDEX
1.1 Introduction
1.2 The complaint
1.3 The powers and functions of the
Public Protector
1.4 The investigation
2.1 The provisions of the Constitution, 1996
2.2 The Code of Conduct for
Public Servants
2.3 The Batho Pele White Paper
2.4 Conclusions
3.1 The Provincial Review Report
3.2 The Report by the Presidential Review
Commission
3.3 The Survey of compliance with the Batho Pele
Policy
3.4 The 1999/2000 Public Service Review Report
3.5 The Report on
Home Affairs, Batho Pele and Management Audit Investigations
3.6 The
Report by the Public Service Commission, dated November 2001, on the state of
the Public Service
3.7 Conclusions
4.1 The causes of delays
4.2 Measures taken
4.3 Conclusions
6.1 The provisions of the Constitution, 1996
6.2 The Commission�s Policy
on Reporting
7.1 The powers of the National Assembly
7.2 The accountability of Members
of the Cabinet
7.3 The powers of Provincial Legislatures
7.4
Accountability of members of Executive Councils of Provincial
Legislatures
7.5 Portfolio Committees
7.6 The role of the Head of a
department or provincial Administration
8.1 Key Findings
8.2 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
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
CHAPTER 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:
CHAPTER 2
THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK OF SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 3
REPORTS ON SERVICE DELIVERY
CHAPTER 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.
CHAPTER 5
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
5.1 As part of the investigation conducted by my office, we approached the
offices of several Ombudsm�n 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.
CHAPTER 6
THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
6.1 The provisions of the Constitution, 1996
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
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.
-
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.
|
