OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA - parliament.gov.za · Establishment of Joint Rules Subcommittee...

Thursday, 5 April 2018] 1

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS NO 39─2018

No 39—2018] FIFTH SESSION, FIFTH PARLIAMENT

PARLIAMENT

OF THE

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

ANNOUNCEMENTS,

TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

THURSDAY, 5 APRIL 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS ANNOUNCEMENTS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1. Referral of Bill to National House of Traditional Leaders ................... 2 2. Draft Bills submitted – Joint Rule 159 ................................................. 2 3. Establishment of Joint Rules Subcommittee ........................................ 2 4. Membership of Committees ................................................................. 3 National Assembly 1. Introduction of Bills.............................................................................. 4 2. Referral to Committees of papers tabled .............................................. 5 National Council of Provinces 1. Membership of Committees ................................................................. 9 TABLINGS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1. Speaker and Chairperson .................................................................... 10 2. Minister of Energy .............................................................................. 10 3. Minister of Justice and Correctional Services .................................... 10 4. Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform ............................. 10

2 [Thursday, 5 April 2018


5. Minister of Transport .......................................................................... 11 6. Minister of Environmental Affairs ..................................................... 11 National Assembly 1. Speaker ............................................................................................... 12 COMMITTEE REPORTS National Assembly 1. Higher Education and Training .......................................................... 16 2. Higher Education and Training .......................................................... 49

ANNOUNCEMENTS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces The Speaker and the Chairperson 1. Referral of Bill to National House of Traditional Leaders

(1) The Acting Secretary to Parliament has, in accordance with

section 18(1) of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, 2003 (Act No. 41 of 2003), referred the Animals Protection Amendment Bill [B 4 – 2018] (National Assembly – sec 76) to the National House of Traditional Leaders, which must, within 30 days from the date of the referral (viz. 4 May 2018), make any comments it wishes to make.

2. Draft Bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

(1) Customary Initiation Bill, 2018, submitted by the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs and the Select Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

3. Establishment of Joint Rules Subcommittee

(1) The Joint Rules Committee resolved in its meeting of 28 March

2018 to establish the Subcommittee on Report of the High Level Panel on the Assessment of Legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change, with the following terms of reference: (a) The Subcommittee is established in terms of Joint Rule

56(1)(f).



(b) The composition and size of the subcommittee is as follows: the Assembly component to consist of 8 members (ANC 3; DA 2; EFF 1; IFP 1 and FF plus 1) and the Council component to consist of 5 members (ANC 3 and Opposition 2).

(c) The Subcommittee: (i) to make recommendations on the processing of the

key findings of the Report of the HLP;

(ii) may exercise relevant powers set out in Joint Rule 35; and

(iii) report to the Joint Rules Committee by 15 May

2018. 4. Membership of Committees

(1) The following members were appointed to the Subcommittee

on the Report of the High Level Panel on the Assessment of Legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change (HLP) in accordance with the composition agreed to by the Joint Rules Committee on 28 March 2018:

National Assembly: ANC: Mr C T Frolick Mr M Coleman Ms P J Mnguni DA: Mr J Steenhuisen Mr M Waters EFF: Dr M Q Ndlozi IFP: Ms L van der Merwe FF+: Adv A Alberts National Council of Provinces: ANC: Mr A J Nyambi Mrs L L Zwane Mr M Mohapi



DA: Ms C Labuschagne UDM: Mr L B Gaehler

(2) Mr A J Nyambi (ANC) and Mr C T Frolick (ANC) are appointed as co-chairpersons of the Subcommittee on the Report of the High Level Panel on the Assessment of Legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change (HLP), in terms of Joint Rule 23(2)(a)(iii) by the co-Chairpersons of the Joint Rules Committee.

National Assembly The Speaker 1. Introduction of Bills

(1) The Minister of Transport

(a) Air Traffic and Navigation Services Company

Amendment Bill [B 6 - 2018] (National Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 41120 of 15 September 2017.]

Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Transport of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160. In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM. The Bill may only be classified after the expiry of at least three parliamentary working days since introduction.

(2) The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (a) Customary Initiation Bill [B 7 - 2018] (National

Assembly – proposed sec 76) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 41498 of 16 March 2018.]

Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160.



In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM. The Bill may only be classified after the expiry of at least three parliamentary working days since introduction.

2. Referral to Committees of papers tabled

(1) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee

on Justice and Correctional Services for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Special Investigating

Unit (SIU) for 2018-19.

(b) Strategic Plan for 2018-19 and Annual Performance Plan of the Public Protector for 2018-19.

(c) Report dated 27 March 2018 on the Provisional

Suspension from office of Ms L B Freeman, Senior Magistrate, Mossel Bay, tabled in terms of section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act No 90 of 1993).


on Police for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the South African Police Service (SAPS) for 2018-19.

(b) Annual Performance Plan of the Civilian Secretariat for

Police for 2018-19.

(3) The following paper is referred to the Portfolio Committee on Police:

(a) Report of the Civilian Secretariat for Police on compliance

of the South African Police Service (SAPS) with the Domestic Violence Act for the period 01 April 2017 to 30 September 2017, tabled in terms of section 6 of the Civilian Secretariat for Police Act, 2011 (Act No 2 of 2011).

(4) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on Public Works for consideration and report: (a) Annual Performance Plan of the Independent

Development Trust for 2018-19. (b) Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Public

Works for 2018-19.



(c) Annual Performance Plan of the Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE) for 2018-19.

(d) Annual Performance Plan of the Council for the Built

Environment (CBE) for 2018-19. (e) Strategic Plan of the Council for the Built Environment

for 2015-20. (f) Annual Performance Plan of the Construction Industry

Development Board (CIDB) for 2017-18 – 2019-20. (g) Annual Performance Plan of the Agrément South Africa

(ASA) for 2018-19.

(5) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises for consideration and report:

(a) Strategic Plan of the Department of Public Enterprises for

2014-15 – 2018-19. (b) Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Public

Enterprises for 2018-19.

(6) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry for consideration and report:

(a) Agreement Amending Annex 1 (Co-Operation on

Investment) of the SADC Protocol on Finance and Investment (FIP); including the Protocol on Finance and Investment, tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.

(b) Explanatory Memorandum to the Agreement Amending

Annex 1 (Co-Operation on Investment) of the SADC Protocol on Finance and Investment (FIP), including the Protocol on Finance and Investment.


on Trade and Industry: (a) Government Notice No 172, published in Government

Gazette No 41473, dated 02 March 2018: The proposed compulsory specification for polymer film for damp-proofing and waterproofing in buildings, in terms of the National Regulator for Compulsory Specification Act, 2008 (Act No 5 of 2008) as amended through Legal Metrology Act, 2014 (Act No 9 of 2014).



(b) Government Notice No 173, published in Government Gazette No 41473, dated 02 March 2018: Amendment to the compulsory specification for Hydraulic Brake and Clutch Fluid-VC8013, in terms of the National Regulator for Compulsory Specification Act, 2008 (Act No 5 of 2008) as amended through Legal Metrology Act, 2014 (Act No 9 of 2014).

(c) Government Notice No 179, published in Government

Gazette No 41472, dated 02 March 2018: Invitation for the public to comment on the prohibition on the use of the ZA Cap logo, in terms of the Merchandise Marks Act 1941, (Act No 17 of 1941).

(d) Government Notice No 180, published in Government

Gazette No 41472, dated 02 March 2018: Invitation for the public to comment on the prohibition on the use of the South African Airways Logo, in terms of the Merchandise Marks Act 1941, (Act No 17 of 1941).

(e) Government Notice No 187, published in Government

Gazette No 41472, dated 02 March 2018: Invitation for the public to comment on the prohibition on the use of the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality Logo, in terms of the Merchandise Marks Act 1941, (Act No 17 of 1941).


on Home Affairs for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Independent Electoral Commission for 2018-19.

(b) Amended Strategic Plan of the Independent Electoral

Commission for 2014-15 – 2018-19. (c) Electoral Commission – Technical Indicator Descriptions

for 2018-19.

(9) The following papers are referred to the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Commission for the

Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL) for 2018-19 – 2021-22.

(b) Annual Performance Plan of the Municipal Infrastructure

Support Agent for 2018-19.



(10) The following paper is referred to the Joint Standing Committee on the Financial Management of Parliament for consideration:

(a) Monthly Financial Statements of Parliament – February

2018, tabled in terms of section 54(1) of the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, 2009 (Act No. 10 of 2009).


on Labour for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) for 2018-19.

(b) Amended Strategic Plan of the National Economic

Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) for 2015-16 – 2019-20.

(c) Revised Strategic Plan of Productivity SA for 2014-15 –

2019-20. (d) Annual Performance Plan of Productivity SA for 2018-19. (e) Revised Strategic Plan of Productivity SA for 2014-15 –

2019-20. (f) Annual Performance Plan of Productivity SA for 2018-19.

(12) The following papers are referred to the Standing Committee

on Finance for consideration and report:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Financial Services Board (FSB) for 2018-19.

(b) Annual Performance Plan for 2018-19 and Strategic Plan

of the Financial Intelligence Centre for 2018-19 – 2022-23.

(c) Annual Performance Plan of the Government Technical

Advisory Centre for 2018-19. (d) Annual Performance Plan of the Pension Funds

Adjudicator for 2018 – 2019. (e) Strategic Plan (Corporate Plan) and Budget of the South

African Special Risk Insurance Association (SASRIA) for 2018 – 19.



(f) Annual Performance Plan of the Office of the Tax Ombud for 2018-19.

(g) Annual Performance Plan of the Government Pensions

Administration Agency for 2018-19. (h) Annual Performance Plan of the South African Revenue

Service (SARS) for 2018-19. (i) Annual Performance Plan of the Office of the Ombud for

Financial Services Providers for 2018 - 19. (j) Annual Performance Plan of the Co-operative Banks

Development Agency for 2018-19. (k) Corporate Plan of the Public Investment Corporation for

2018-19.

(13) The following papers are referred to the Standing Committee on Finance for consideration and report, and to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts:

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Independent Regulatory

Board for Auditors (IRBA) for 2018-19 – 2020-21.

(b) Annual Performance Plan of the Accounting Standards Board for 2018-19.

(14) The following paper is referred to the Joint Standing

Committee on Defence for consideration, and to the Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans:

(a) Letter from the President of the Republic, dated 26 March

2018, to the Speaker of the National Assembly, informing members of the Assembly of the employment of the South African National Defence Force in fulfilment of the international obligations of the Republic of South Africa towards the United Nations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

National Council of Provinces The Chairperson 1. Membership of Committees

(1) The following members have been nominated by their parties to

serve on the Ad Hoc Joint Committee on Parliament and Provincial Medical Aid Scheme:



Member Province Party

1. Hon. Ms Z V Ncitha Eastern Cape ANC 2. Hon. Mr J P Parkies Free State ANC 3. Hon. Mr E M Mlambo Gauteng ANC 4. Hon. Mr M Khawula KwaZulu-Natal IFP 5. Hon. Mrs M C Dikgale Limpopo ANC 6. Hon. Mr M T Mhlanga Mpumalanga ANC 7. Hon. Ms G G Oliphant Northern Cape ANC 8. Hon. Mrs T J Mokwele North West EFF 9. Hon. Mr J J Londt Western Cape DA

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1. The Speaker and the Chairperson

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Financial and Fiscal

Commission (FFC) for 2018 – 2019. (b) Strategic Plan of the Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) for

2014 – 2019. (c) Annual Performance Plan of the Commission for Gender

Equality (CGE) for 2018 – 2019. (d) Strategic Plan of the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) for

2018 – 2023. 2. The Minister of Energy

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Energy for 2018/19.

3. The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Justice and

Constitutional Development for 2018/2019.

4. The Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform

(a) Annual Performance Plan of the Office of the Valuer-General for 2018/19.

(b) Strategic Plan of the Office of the Valuer-General for 2018/19 –

2022/23.



5. The Minister of Transport (a) Annual Performance Plan of the South African National Roads

Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) for 2018/2019 – 2020/2021. (b) Annual Performance Plan of the South African Maritime Safety

Authority (SAMSA) for 2018/19. (c) Strategic Plan of the South African Maritime Safety Authority

for 2015 - 2020.

6. The Minister of Environmental Affairs

(a) Government Notice No 14, published in Government Gazette No 41380, dated 12 January 2018: Proposed regulations to exclude a waste stream or a portion of a waste stream from the definition of waste, in terms of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (Act No 59 of 2008).

(b) Government Notice No 104, published in Government Gazette No 41434 dated 08 February 2018: Appointment of the Environmental Assessment Practitioners Association of South Africa as the Single Registration Authority, in terms of section 24H of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998).

(c) Government Notice No 86, published in Government Gazette No 41432 dated 09 February 2018: National guideline on minimum information Requirements for Preparing Environmental Impact Assessment for Mining Activities that Require Environmental Authorisation, in terms of section 24J of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998).

(d) Government Notice No 112, published in Government Gazette No 41445, dated 16 February 2018: Draft Alien and Invasive Species Regulations, in terms of section 97(1) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004), set out in the Schedule hereto.

(e) Government Notice No 113, published in Government Gazette No 41445, dated 16 February 2018: Procedure to be followed in applying for environmental authorisation for large scale electricity transmission and distribution development activities identified, in terms of section 24(2)(a) of the National Environmental Management: Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998).

(f) Government Notice No 114, published in Government Gazette No 41445, dated 16 February 2018: Provide for the procedure to be followed in applying for environmental authorisation for large scale wind and solar photovoltaic energy development activities identified, in terms of section 24(2)(a) of the National Environmental Management: Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998).



(g) Government Notice No 115, published in Government Gazette No 41445, dated 16 February 2018: Draft amendments to the Alien and Invasive Species lists, in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004).

(h) Government Notice No 116, published in Government Gazette No 41445, dated 16 February 2018: Draft Buffalo River Mouth Estuarine Management Plan, in terms of the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (Act No 24 of 2008).

National Assembly 1. The Speaker

(a) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, as adopted by the House on 15 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

(b) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Economic Development, as adopted by the House on 23 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Economic Development.

(c) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs, as adopted by the House on 23 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs.

(d) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Health, as adopted by the House on 9 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Health.

(e) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training, as adopted by the House on 9 November 2017.



Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training.

(f) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, as adopted by the House on 15 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs.

(g) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation, as adopted by the House on 14 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation.

(h) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, as adopted by the House on 7 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services.

(i) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Labour, as adopted by the House on 31 October 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Labour.

(j) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources, as adopted by the House on 31 October 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources.

(k) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Police, as adopted by the House on 31 October 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Police.

(l) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises, as adopted by the House on 29 November 2017.



Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises.

(m) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration as well as Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, as adopted by the House on 15 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration as well as Performance Monitoring and Evaluation.

(n) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform, as adopted by the House on 7 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform.

(o) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology, as adopted by the House on 14 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Science and Technology.

(p) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Small Business Development, as adopted by the House on 15 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Small Business Development.

(q) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation, as adopted by the House on 23 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation.

(r) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Tourism, as adopted by the House on 31 October 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Tourism.



(s) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, as adopted by the House on 14 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry.

(t) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Water and Sanitation, as adopted by the House on 23 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Water and Sanitation.

(u) Reply from the Minister of Finance to recommendations in Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of Portfolio Committee on Women in The Presidency, as adopted by the House on 23 November 2017.

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Women in The Presidency.

(v) Policy on the appointment of special advisors to the Executive

Authority at the Public Protector, South Africa, submitted in terms of section 3 (11) (a)-(b) of the Public Protector Act, 1994 (Act No. 23 of 1994).

Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services and the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration for consideration and report. The committees to confer and the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services to report.

(w) Rules relating to investigations by the Public Protector

and matters incidental thereto, 2018, submitted in terms of section 7(11) of the Public Protector Act, 1994 (Act No. 23 of 1994). Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services.



COMMITTEE REPORTS National Assembly 1. REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON

HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON ITS OVERSIGHT VISIT TO GAUTENG, DATED 14 MARCH 2018

The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training having

conducted an oversight visit to the post-school education and training

institutions in Gauteng on 30 January – 01 February 2018, reports as

follows.

1. Delegation list

1.1 Members of the Committee

Hon D Kekana (ANC), Hon J Kilian (ANC), Hon R Mavunda (ANC), Hon

S Mchunu (ANC), Hon C September: Chairperson (ANC), Hon B Bozzoli

(DA) and Hon A van der Westhuizen (DA).

1.2 Support staff

Mr A Kabingesi: Committee Secretary, Ms M Modiba: Content Adviser and

Mr L Ben: Committee Assistant.

2. Introduction

In pursuance of its constitutional oversight obligation, the Committee

undertook an oversight visit to the University of South Africa (UNISA),

University of Pretoria (UP) and University of Johannesburg (UJ).

The objectives of the oversight visit were to:

• Assess the 2018 registration process;

• Assess the preparedness of the institutions in implementing the 2018

academic programmes;

• Assess the 2017 overall academic performance of students; and

• Undertake site visits to infrastructure projects, student

accommodation and registration facilities.



In addition to the afore-mentioned objectives of the oversight visit, the

Committee engaged with the relevant stakeholders of each institution which

included: student representative council; labour unions and council.

3. Summary of the presentations and site visits

3.1 University of South Africa

3.1.1 Management

The Vice-Chancellor, Prof M Makhanya and members of the executive

management made the presentation which highlighted the following. In

providing a background on salary negotiations with the unions and the

industrial action, the University indicated that management agreed on a final

offer of 6.5 percent salary increment to the unions. However, the unions

rejected the offer and declared a dispute on 8 December 2017. The matter

was referred to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

(CCMA) on 17 January 2018 for conciliation. The strike by members of the

National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU)

commenced on 17 January 2018. Management made an offer of 7.2 percent

salary increment considering the financial position of the University.

NEHAWU demanded a 9 percent salary increment, but was willing to

consider a full 7.5 percent increment without conditions. Management

reached an agreement with NEHAWU on 24 January 2018 at a meeting

with the Deputy Minister of Higher Education and Training which ended

the strike.

In relation to the students’ demands and strike on 12 and 15 January 2018,

the University indicated that the Economic Freedom Fighters Student

Command (EFFSC) in the Gauteng region prevented both the staff and

students from entering the campus to work or register, and demanded that

management accept walk-ins’ applications for new students. Moreover,

students at the Sunnyside Campus were also prevented from registering by

the South African Student Congress (SASCO) since it had demanded

management’s attention. Management met with the EFFSC and SASCO

leadership and agreed to consider their demands which subsequently ended

the disruptions.



With regard to the 2018 registration, the University indicated that eight (8)

days of registration were lost due to the strike by NEHAWU members and

two days were lost from student disruptions. However, the online

registration remained open during the disruptions. The University has

received 76 352 applications since the 15 January 2018.

With regard to the student population based on the October 2017 numbers,

the University had 69 648 first-time entering headcount enrolments, of

which 68.25 percent were females and 31.75 percent males. Of this number,

49.06 percent of the students were between the ages 18 – 24 and 25 percent

fell into the 25 – 29 year age group. The majority of the students at the

University were Africans, which constituted 77 percent of the total student

population, followed by Whites at 11.28 percent, Coloureds 5.62 percent

and Indians 4.81 percent. 43 percent of the student population were

employed students followed by 37 percent unemployed students looking for

work and 4 percent were students that were not economically active.

The majority of students at the University were registered at the College of

Education (79 350 in 2016). The first year dropout rate at the University

was relatively higher than the normal 24 percent of the higher education

sector. The College of Science, Engineering and Technology had a first

year dropout rate of 38 percent. A total of 32 480 students graduated in

2016. The University had a total of 33 305 NSFAS funded students in 2017.

3.1.2 National Student Representative Council (NSRC)

The NSRC began the presentation by thanking the Committee for visiting

the institution and also felt that the oversight visit had been long overdue

given the past impasses that had been consistent at the University. The

NSRC consisted of nine members out of the 99 total SRC members

nationally. The nine NSRC members were located at the main campus

(Muckleneuk Campus) and were elected into office in 2016. The NSRC was

represented in the Council, Senate and Institutional Forum of the University.

In relation to the 2018 registration, the NSRC indicated that the industrial

action impacted negatively on the 2018 registration process. The University

had up to eight (8) days of registration for 2018 instead of 21 days as at

30 January 2018 due to industrial action. The NSRC proposed for the

extension of the registration period beyond the 31 January 2018 closing date

to compensate for lost time.



The NSRC indicated that the 2018 registration process was compounded by

inefficient information and communication technology (ICT) systems of the

University, which were unable to handle the high traffic volumes of online

applications. As a result, the University lost R300 million due to the failure

by management to introduce a new ICT infrastructure. They called for a

forensic investigation into the tribal ICT project.

The NSRC said that the ICT systems of the University were not integrated

and this affected the entire registration value chain. There were engineers

that had approached the University with proposals to fix its ICT systems.

However, they were not successful. The NSRC indicated that the

management of the University was reactionary and indecisive. They

expressed a concern about the University’s enrolment plan which was not

consulted with the NSRC, and indicated that the capping of enrolment was

against government plans to increase access to higher education.

In so far as the student profile of the University is concerned, the NSRC

indicated that the University was attracting a larger number of

undergraduate students from all over the country. As a result, these young

students came from all over country to register at the Pretoria Campus

without a place to stay. Therefore, the University should consider making

provision for student accommodation, especially for its young student

population.

With regard to the administration of NSFAS funding, the NSRC indicated

that students experienced serious challenges to access help from NSFAS

pertaining to their applications for financial assistance. The location of

NSFAS in Cape Town compounded the situation, since students were

forced to call the NSFAS call centre to make inquiries. The University had a

bottleneck of applications that were not yet processed by NSFAS, and this

also contributed to the late payment of sBux allowances. The NSRC

proposed that: the NSFAS call centre should be toll free; all the provinces

should have NSFAS offices; the payment of book allowances should be fast

tracked; the DHET should increase its subsidy to the University and

infrastructure grants should be allocated to the University.



The NSRC expressed concerns about inadequate coordination and poor

management of the University. The NSRC elaborated that consequence

management at the University was inadequate. In supporting this statement,

the NSRC indicated that in 2017, there was a delay in the delivery

of learning materials to 244 students. As a result, the University lost

R24 million in the process. Many students dropped-out in 2017 due to this

difficulty. The NSRC proposed for the establishment of an independent

commission of inquiry to investigate financial mismanagement and a loss of

R24 million by the University. The NSRC also urged the Committee to

assist in ensuring that there is accountability in the use of public funds by

the University.

In so far as teaching and learning is concerned, the NSRC expressed a

concern about the inadequate student support services at the University. In

support of this statement, they indicated that there was a shortage of

lecturers to assist students with academic queries. Moreover, the absence of

a call centre compounded the situation. The University was struggling to

assist students to access teaching and learning materials and the student

lecturer ratio was very high. The University had a high number of staff in

acting positions, including the critical position of the Registrar.

The NSRC expressed a concern about the University’s whistleblower whom

they accused of being biased towards a certain race. In addition, they also

accused the University’s new Ombudsman of being ineffective and

favouring certain individuals within the University. The NSRC also

indicated that they had called for the Vice-Chancellor to be removed for not

dealing with student grievances effectively and not taking the SRC

seriously.

In relation to the media reports on freeloading SRC living the high life, the

NSRC indicated that they were amongst the poorest SRCs in the higher

education sector. In support of this statement, the NSRC indicated that the

University did not provide them with transport for their activities. The

blazers that were reported in the media to be R7 500 each were mischievous

reports meant to undermine the credibility of the NSRC. The NSRC

members received accommodation provided by the institution at R3 700 per



month, including laptops and cellphones which would be returned to the

institutions at the end of the NSRC term of office. They also reported that

management was undermining the legitimacy of the NSRC and responded,

to unelected structures.

3.1.3 Academics and Professional Staff Union (APSA)

Ms S Malema made the presentation on behalf of APSA. She indicated that

the union advocated for the rights of the marginalised and disadvantaged

workers at higher education institutions. With regard to the union’s

relationship with management, Ms Malema described the relationship as

being complex and mysterious as well as unpredictable.

Ms Malema indicated that the union has been experiencing threats of being

de-recognised by management of the University, and this was detrimental to

the union’s finances since it had been paying for legal fees in its quest to

remain relevant and recognised by management. The union was served with

letters of interdict by management on 19 January 2018. However, it

contested the interdict and won the case in the labour court, and it would

continue to advocate for workers’ rights irrespective of the management’s

intimidation tactics.

The union expressed a concern about transformation at the University,

especially at senior management level. It indicated that the University did

not meet its employment equity plan targets. An example was made about

the promotions at the University, which favoured a selected few academics,

excluding equity candidates. The union called upon the University to assist

and develop young and emerging academics to get promoted to senior posts.

The union was against the hiring of external candidates to top positions

while internal staff remained stagnant. The union also indicated that many

black lecturers published in some journals which the University did not

recognize and this was disadvantaging most of the black academics when it

came to promotion. Furthermore, the union expressed a concern about the

lack of transformation in the publishing space.

The union welcomed the decision by Council to establish a task team that

provided guidance into the insourcing of cleaning and security staff that

were exploited by private service providers. However, the challenge of the

union is the integration of the insourced staff into the University so that they



can enjoy similar benefits with other employees at the University. The union

expressed a concern about the remuneration of senior academics who held

professorate titles whilst being heavily indebted.

The union expressed a concern about inadequate transformation in the

procurement of service providers by the University. The union indicated

that the Purchasing Consortium Southern Africa (PURCO) enjoyed a

monopoly in the procurement of the University’s certain goods and services

at the expense of emerging service providers. The union noted that PURCO

was gatekeeping and not contributing to empowerment of black people.

Furthermore, the Council took a decision to decolonise the University but

there has not been feedback to staff members on the implementation of the

road map towards realizing the goal.

3.1.4 National Education and Health Allied Workers Union

(NEHAWU)

Mr S Makena presented on behalf of the union. He acknowledged that the

industrial action was led by NEHAWU and took eight (8) days and this

affected the 2018 registration process. He blamed the slow pace by

management to respond to the union’s demands, which forced workers to

down tools and force management to negotiate for a better salary increment.

As a result, the union reached an agreement with management to settle for a

7.5 percent salary increment on 26 January 2018 which ended the strike.

The union expressed concerns with regard to: procurement of inefficient

ICT systems by the university; purchasing of certain machines that were not

required by the institution; biased whistleblower; composition of council

with the majority of members from the corporate sector who had no

knowledge of the higher education sector; council not prioritising student

issues; council sitting for too many special meetings; inadequate oversight

role by council over management; two members of council implicated in the

state capture allegations; racism at the level of academic staff; unequal

remuneration of staff at the same level (Blacks were occupying the lowest

quintiles while Whites are on high quintiles). The union also reported that

the student lecturer ratio at the University was high.



3.1.5 Council

The Council was represented by Prof Nkondo who expressed his gratitude

about the visit of the Committee to the University. He indicated that the

Council supported management in its quest to advance the University’s core

mandate of teaching and learning, and council was also updated about the

latest developments at the University. In 2016, Council and Senate agreed to

reposition the University’s direction to be responsive to latest developments

at the University. Council resolved that the University’s curriculum should

be reviewed since it was too westernized and should also be responsive to

the country’s cultural diversity. Prof Nkondo indicated that the promotion of

African languages into the institution’s curriculum is fundamental in

repositioning the University’s strategic direction.

Prof Nkondo indicated that the University belonged to a consortium of five

universities which had begun to elevate African languages to be used as

medium of instruction. He indicated that the University is planning to offer

degrees in African languages similar to what the University of KwaZulu-

Natal and the University of Limpopo had already been implementing.

Council was also planning to reposition the University to be responsive to

the call of radical economic transformation. Council welcomed the call for

free higher education for the poor and working class. However, it raised a

concern about the manner in which it was pronounced which was traumatic

to institutions as they were forced to re-plan and revise their budgets.

3.1.6 Site visits

3.1.6.1 Eskia Mphahlele Administration Hall

The Committee was taken to the Eskia Mphahlele Administration Hall

where the registration of first time entering and returning students took

place. The Committee observed very long queues of students who were

waiting to be assisted with their application and registration. The University

indicated that the closing date for 2018 applications was 30 September

2017. However, due to the Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher

education on 16 December 2017, the University saw it fit to provide

additional opportunity for students who missed the cut off date in 2017. The



registration process for 2018 was disturbed by the industrial action which

lasted for eight (8) days. The University indicated that it was processing

both the applications of students that did not apply previously as well their

registration simultaneously to accommodate walk-ins. This had contributed

to the long queues and the University was able to assist all the students who

were in the queues. The staff at the registration facility worked up until

20h00 in the evening in trying to help all the students who needed to be

registered.

The University had spaces for 20 000 new entrants for the 2018 academic

year mostly in degree programmes. However, not all the students that

applied for registration met the minimum entry requirements into degree

programmes. The students that did not meet the minimum entry

requirements into degree programmes were admitted into higher certificate

programmes. The registration for the 2018 academic year would close on

31 January 2018. The University would open for another phase of

registration in March for the second semester 2018.

The Committee was informed that students were required to pay a non-

refundable amount of R105 to apply to the institution. Moreover, students

were given up to the end of February to make a minimum payment of

33 percent of his/her total tuition fees. Students who qualified for NSFAS

were exempted from making this payment.

The registration facility was equipped with 195 computers which assisted

students with their application and registration. The registration of a single

student could take up to 20 minutes. The University’s online registration

system was functional. However, some students preferred to be assisted at

the registration facility instead of registering on their own. At the

registration facility, there were special advisors (experts trained in the

curriculum requirements) for each college and access and matriculation

exemptions services. Academic support was provided for the returning

students who enrolled in Bachelor of Law (LLB) because of new modules

which were introduced from 2018 academic year.



3.1.6.2 Printing facility

The Committee visited the University’s in-house printing facility where the

printing of all study materials and examination papers took place. The

facility made use of lithographic pressers to print the study materials which

was more cost effective and efficient in printing large volumes of papers as

compared to digital printers. The University indicated that besides the

lithographic machines, they also had digital machines which printed less

copies than the lithographic machines. The facility was also equipped with

folding and binding machines for the study materials. The University had its

own technicians who were responsible for the maintenance of the machines,

and some of the machines were 15 – 20 years old. The Committee was also

informed that there were cameras installed in the building to record every

movement in the unit.

The facility had a dispatch unit which was responsible for storage and

dispatch of the learning material to all provinces as well as outside the

boarders of the country. The University made use of courier companies and

the post office to deliver learning material. The University paid R15 million

annually to the post office to distribute its learning materials. The University

hired students that assisted with the packing of learning materials into

parcels and they were paid for their services. The facility employed 300

people at the main campus and 230 at the Florida Campus.

3.1.6.3 Library

The Committee was informed that the University’s library had eight floors

and was the largest library in Africa. The University also had 14 libraries

across the regions, including one in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia. The

Committee was informed that the first floor of the library hosted a variety of

textbooks and other academic collections. The second floor had a

digitisation machine worth R2 million and also hosted the learning materials

of national heritage, Unisa archives, past exam papers and copies of

dissertations. The third floor was responsible for handling of all the

students’ queries pertaining the library and its services.



The Committee was informed that the library subscribed to 120 databases

and students were able to access online catalogues or journals anywhere

as long as they were registered with institution. The library also had

3.5 million books in the shelfs and 6 500 e-books available online. The

University experienced a challenge of some students owing library fines up

to R2000. However, negotiations were undertaken to ensure that the

students were not disadvantaged to access the library material. The

University recycled the old books and also donated some of them to needy

schools.

3.2 University of Pretoria

3.2.1 Management

Prof C de la Rey: Vice-Chancellor made the presentation with her senior

executives. In relation to the University facts based on the 2017 figures, the

University had 9 Faculties and a Business School (Gordon Institute of

Business Science). The total student enrolment at the University for 2017

was 53 024 and this number excluded the distance learning students who

were approximately 10 000. In terms of student demographics, 59.8 percent

of the total student population was made up of black students and the

majority of students at the University were enrolled in the scarce skills

programmes. The majority of students at the University were females who

constituted 56.8 percent of the student population and males were

43.2 percent at undergraduate level. At postgraduate level, females

constituted 52.3 percent of the student body while males were 47.7 percent.

The University enrolled 24 760 students in scarce skills programmes in

2016 and it produced 5 142 graduates in this field. The University had the

higher number of masters graduates in 2016, 1 811 as compared to other

universities. The University also produced the second highest number of

doctoral graduates in 2016, 302.

The University had six campuses, namely: Groenkloof; Hatfield; Hillcrest;

Illovo; Mamelodi; Onderstepoort and Prinshof. The total staff complement

of the University was 5 323 workers including staff on fixed-term contract.

55.5 percent of staff were black and 26.8 percent were academics.



With regard to the University’s research footprint, the University produced

11.3 percent of all South African publications and employed 10 percent of

National Research Foundation (NRF) rated researchers. There were 15 NRF

A-rated researchers at the University and it produced 3.24 research outputs

units per capita in 2016, the highest output per capita in South Africa.

The transformation goals of the University include: ensuring access for a

diverse student body; ensuring realization of employment equity goals;

enhancing research capacity and productivity of black and women

academics and cultivating an inclusive institutional culture. Some of the

transformation milestones include: rea bua dialogue series; lekgotla process;

new language policy; independent transformation panel and institutional

transformation committee.

In relation to the administration of NSFAS funding, there were 3 101 new

first year students that were assisted to register without paying the initial fee

and 484 senior undergraduate students. The number of returning students

without NSFAS financial assistance that were assisted to register were

5 485. NSFAS delayed in confirming students who qualified for funding

and this caused anxiety among students during the registration period. The

fee-free higher education announcement without aligned processes and

systems in place was a challenge for the University. Compounding the

situation was confusing communication from the DHET and NSFAS. The

outstanding remittance due to the University amounted to R52 million.

In relation to student housing, the University had a total of 34 student

residences with a capacity of 10 011 beds. Black students were the majority

at the residences at 78.6 percent as compared to 21.4 percent whites. The

University had limited capacity to meet the growing demand for student

housing. All the residences had IT laboratories and easily accessible WiFi.

With regard to student academic performance, only 40 percent of students

completed their degrees within regulation time based on the 2012 cohort

and 67 percent completed their degrees on the fifth year. The throughput

analysis for a 4 year undergraduate programme for the 2011 cohort was

36 percent. The average drop-out rates for 3-year undergraduate

programmes was 21 percent, which was relatively lower than the 24 percent

average for the sector



3.2.2 Student Representative Council

The presentation was made by the SRC President, Mr K Moloto. He

indicated that the SRC had 19 members made up of 11 members from the

Democratic Alliance (DA), three (3) from the Economic Freedom Fighters

(EFF) and five (5) other independent members. The SRC came into office in

September 2017.

Mr Moloto said that the challenges of students at the University include:

lack of affordable food for students especially those living in student

residences and students normally exhaust their food allowance funds by

September of each academic year; the mental health illness was an ongoing

concern for students; shortage of student accommodation remained a serious

concern for students. Moreover, the University was unable to meet the

growing demand for student housing, and the private accommodation in the

Hatfield area was unaffordable for many students; the delays by NSFAS in

paying allowances due to students remained a serious concern; the growing

number of students with historic debt was concerning and the historic debt

at the University was estimated at R300 million; the missing middle

students were struggling to cope with their academic work due to

insufficient funding from the University to carry their debt; the policy

uncertainty on the implementation of fee-free higher education was a

serious concern for students; the SRC did not have adequate funding to

implement its activities due to budgetary constraints.

The SRC lauded the manner in which the 2018 registration was undertaken.

They noted that both the management and the SRC team worked together

very well to ensure that prospective students were assisted accordingly. The

SRC operated a help desk service to provide information to students who

applied as well as the walk-ins.

The SRC proposed that the Committee should consider the possibility of

negotiating with the provincial government to provide social housing for

poor students; the Department should provide clarity on the implementation

of free higher education for the poor; food grants should be provided to

higher education institutions and the historic debt should be cleared.




(NEHAWU)

Ms K Mathekga: Shop steward made the presentation on behalf NEHAWU.

She indicated that the union represented 16 percent of the total staff

complement at the University. The union had 12 shop stewards in all major

constituencies/campuses as well branch office bearers. The union was not

represented in the institutional transformation committee, skills

development committee and employment equity forum.

The union’s achievements include: revival of its branch; advocating a

demand for a benchmarking exercise for mid-point salary adjustments;

additional health providers; reduction of employee cases and continuously

protecting workers’ rights in the University.

The union’s challenges include: non-representation in key University

committees and forums such as the institutional forum (IF); lack of

consultation from management on key decisions affecting staff; lack of

interest from academic staff to participate in the labour movement;

intimidation of staff especially at lower levels; slow rate of transformation

as it relates to representation of black academics, women and people living

with disabilities at middle and senior management and tender processes

favouring previously advantaged companies. Moreover, the union reported

that management had frozen some position indicating financial pressures.

They advocated for an establishment of a single national bargaining council

for the entire higher education sector

3.2.4 University of Pretoria Workers Union

Mr C Hatting: Secretary and full time representative of the union made the

presentation on behalf of the union. He indicated that the union was

established in 1996 when the employees of the University felt they were not

fairly treated when the amalgamation of various tertiary institutions started.

Mr Hatting said that the union’s members were employees in all categories

at the University and there was no barrier to join the union as long as a

member was an employee of the University. The union was represented in

the Employment Equity Committee, Institutional Forum, the University’s



bargaining forum and the Skills Development Forum. He alluded that the

University had good policies in place to structure the relations between

employee and employers and the role of the union was to monitor the

implementation of those policies. Furthermore, the union was not radical

and it was not its role to act in that manner. Mr Hatting indicated that it

would take a major incident or event to get academics in this union to

embark on industrial action.

Mr Hatting indicated that the two big challenges of the union were: to

convince management and the executive that the unions were not a threat

and there were a lot of common ground to find solutions to challenges

facing the University and the apathy of employees to the unions. The key

achievement of the union was to subscribe to the agreements reached with

the University management.

3.2.5. Academics and Professional Staff Association (APSA)

The union did not raise major concerns. They indicated that they were

accepted at the University on 30 January 2018. They requested that there

should be a development of a policy to provide for the unions to support the

struggles of students as the student supported the workers when they fought

for insourcing.

3.2.6 Site visits Hillcrest Campus

3.2.6.1 Registration facilities

The Committee visited the registration facilities which were situated at the

Hillcrest Campus to assess the 2018 registration process. The Committee

was informed that the applications for the 2018 academic year were opened

in March 2017. The University sent emails for provisional acceptance to

students, including student numbers. However, registration at the campus

commenced on 10 January 2018 up until 29 January 2018. The University’s

online registration system assisted significantly for the 2018 registration

process since 90 percent of the applications were completed online. The

students who came to apply at the registration facilities wanted to get

clarification about other aspects of their registration.



The Committee was taken to the different sections of the registration

facilities. The enrolment contract section was where students signed a

contract which set a basis for acceptance of disciplinary code and academic

performance. The University had a disability section which catered for

students with various special needs. The NSFAS section dealt with all the

queries of students pertaining to their applications for NSFAS funding. The

facility had an international affairs section which took care of all the needs

of the international students. Some of the international students came to

University without study visas and the University was able to provide

assistance required for them attain the relevant documentation.

The Committee observed that the registration value chain of the University

was well organized with sufficient personnel to help students with their

inquiries. There were no queues at the facilities since the registration

process had been closed already. The University indicated that it was not in

a position to accept walk-ins. However, they were referred to the DHET

clearing house or encouraged to apply when the new registration period for

2019 opens in March 2018. The University had a five-year enrolment plan

with the Department which must be adhered to, otherwise it won’t be able to

fund the unplanned students.

The University had 60 computers for self-help registration and for students

to log into the portal to register modules. The University’s portal was easily

accessible to students from any device and they could view their registration

status. The IT support personnel was on site during the registration period to

assist with any IT related challenges. The students were issued with a

student card once they completed the registration process. The student card

could be issued within five minutes and the University had issued 10 600

student cards since the beginning of the registration period.

3.2.6.2 Tuks Monate Dining Hall

The Committee was informed that the Tuks Monate dining hall was a state

of the art building that was refurbished and re-opened in 2014. The

refurbishment project was a joint initiative between the University and the

Department. The Department contributed 50 percent of the total cost of the

project and remainder was covered by the University. The University took a



decision to centralise the dining hall which made it easier to adhere to the

food safety regulations. The dining hall catered for 2002 students living in

the residences.

The Committee observed that the dining was very clean and a good space

for students to enjoy their meals. The University indicated students

complained about the expensive food prices at the dining hall in comparison

to the nearby food outlets. As a result, students preferred to eat starch and

other fast food which were not very healthy. The University also indicated

that it provided students with an upfront food allowance of R14 400 so that

they do not starve whilst waiting for their allowances to be paid by NSFAS

or other bursaries. However, some of the students depleted their food

allowances quickly through reckless spending such as buying food for

friends. The University was able to track the spending patterns of students

and provide the transaction history to the parents or bursars.

3.5.6.3 House Maroela Student Residence

The Committee was taken to one of the old student residence at the Hillcrest

Campus which had 236 beds. The Committee was informed that the

residence would be celebrating its 50th birthday of its existence during 2018.

Furthermore, it was also due for refurbishments in 2018 and its occupants

would be moved to alternative accommodation whilst the renovations were

underway. The University had a 15-year timeline for refurbishments of each

residence.

The Committee was informed that the residence had a house committee

which looked after the affairs of the students at the residence. The

University placed more emphasis on academic excellence for students

residing in residences. There were various student support programmes that

were implemented to ensure that students succeed in their studies. The

residences also competed for the best performing residence which also

encouraged students to study hard.

The University indicated that students had to pass their studies in order to be

re-admitted in the residences. The new students were encouraged to limit

partaking in many social activities until they settle in their studies. The



students were also required to adhere to the code of conduct of the

residence. In relation to racial integration, the students indicated that there

were no incidents of racial discrimination experienced by students and they

got along very well.

3.5.6.4 Tuks Village

The Tuks Village was a state of the art student residences established in

2008 with 640 beds in different residence blocks. The Committee was taken

to the village centre which was the main recreational facility at the village.

The centre was a social space for students to interact, read and watch variety

of sports. The centre provided students with an environment where they

could feel welcomed at the village irrespective of their backgrounds. The

village centre contributed to a quality living and learning space which had

book shelves, televisions and Timbuktu lounge for intellectual space.

The Committee was informed that there were no initiation practices for new

students and all the activities at the village were voluntary. Students were

encouraged to contribute R70 for the maintenance of the village centre,

However, this contribution was not compulsory. The Committee observed

that the residence rooms and its surrounding were very clean and well

maintained.

3.3 University of Johannesburg

3.3.1 Management

The presentation on the administration of NSFAS bursaries was made Ms N

Mamorare: Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Finance and highlighted the

following: The University experienced an increase in the number of NSFAS

funded students over the past five (5) years from 8 151 students in 2013 to

20 053 in 2018. The growth in the student numbers included the University’s

investment of R156 million for students funding over the same period.

Ms Mamorare said that the University started a fundraising campaign to

assist the missing middle students. She indicated that the University’s SRC

Trust Fund had been allocated R58 million since 2014 to pay registration

fees for academically deserving students not funded by NSFAS.



Furthermore, the University had raised R355 million since 2014 through the

support from students, staff, sector education and training authorities

(SETAs), private sector and foundations. The University took a huge

financial risk in 2018 by unblocking 12 000 returning students who were not

yet funded by NSFAS.

Ms Mamorare indicated that the challenges of the University with NSFAS

include: poor administration at NSFAS; ineffective roll-out of the student-

centred model; IT systems that were not integrated; delays in funding

outcomes; historic debt for NSFAS funded students and senior students that

were not funded; highly indebted students and poor response from students

in signing NSFAS loan agreement forms.

Prof A Parekh: DVC Academic made the presentation on student success

and throughput. She indicated that the success rates for the 2017 academic

year were not yet available since the data was being processed. The 2016

undergraduate success rate for 2016 was 84.2 percent. In terms of gender,

female undergraduate students were performing better than their male

counterparts at 88.2 percent in comparison to 82.2 percent male in 2016.

The student throughput rate for 3-year undergraduate programme was

37 percent in 2014 and 58 percent for honours degrees. The dropout rate in

undergraduate programmes was 16 percent in 2016. The University

produced 12 770 graduates in 2016.

Prof K Burger: Registrar made the presentation on registration. She

indicated that the applications for the 2018 academic year closed at the end

of September 2017 for undergraduate programmes. Ms Burger said that the

University received 115 000 undergraduate applications for 10 500 spaces.

The final selection of qualifying students was undertaken after the release of

the grade 12 results. The online registration system opened on 8 January

2018 and close to 35 000 (83 percent) of undergraduate students registered

through this system.

3.3.2 Student Representative Council

Mr C Kekana: President made the presentation. Mr Kekana said that the

delays by NSFAS in the payment of allowances was the biggest challenge

of students at the University. He indicated that the University enrolled



students from poor family households who did not have means to afford

higher education studies. The students were confused about the guidelines

of the new student centred model and the need to sign loan agreement

forms. As a result, some of the students were owed outstanding claims as far

back as 2015.

In relation to the 2018 registration, Mr Kekana said that the registration for

new students commenced smoothly. However, some of the returning

students who were funded by NSFAS in 2017 were unable to register since

NSFAS had not paid for their 2018 academic year. These students were also

losing spaces at their residences since the institution cannot register them.

The financial aid offices of the University were unable to resolve the

challenges of students with NSFAS. Students were advised to call NSFAS

to resolve their queries.

The SRC proposed that the University extends the 2018 registration beyond

the 02 February 2018 to allow students with NSFAS challenges to register.

The SRC also called for a meeting with NSFAS to address all the challenges

experienced by students with the new student centred model.


(NEHAWU)

The presentation was made by Mr L Modibedi: Branch Secretary. He

indicated that the union represented 1 400 staff members at the University

which was 32 percent of the staff complement. In relation to insourcing, Mr

Modibedi indicated that the University insourced workers from gardening

services, cleaners and security. However, the workers that were insourced

were not remunerated at the similar level with other low level staff at the

University and the union was advocating for fair remuneration of these

workers.

The union expressed a concern about the total cost to company

remuneration package offered by the University. The union indicated that

employees were forced to contribute to the medical aid expenses from their

salaries. The minimum contribution for the Discovery Medical Aid was

R780 for a principal member and workers had many beneficiaries to add in

their medical aid leaving them with very little amount to cover for other

expenses. The union proposed that the University should subsidise the

medical expenses for workers.



The union expressed a concern about the slow pace of transformation at the

University. It indicated that the University did not have a Transformation

Committee. The union gave an example of other departments at the

University which were predominantly white, such as the central admissions

and finance departments. In addition, the union said that the engineering

faculty was dominated by foreign nationals at the expense of young and

emerging black academics. There were also gaps in the remuneration of

male and female workers doing the same job.

The union indicated that the University did not provide sufficient support to

workers with special needs. A partially sighted staff member had to resign

due to frustrations and lack of support from management. In relation to staff

discipline, the union indicated that the staff members at the lower level of

institution were easily dismissed, whilst senior managers’ disciplinary

processes took much longer.

The union welcomed the dismissal of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for

Finance who was accused of defrauding the University R25 million. The

union indicated that it laid criminal charges against the former DVC. The

union requested the Committee to assist in getting information on the

management of the University finances, especially the third stream income,

since management refused to furnish the union with these documents. The

union also called upon the Committee to assist with the establishment of a

central bargaining forum for the higher education sector.

3.3.5 Site visits

3.3.5.1 Registration facility

The Committee visited the temporary registration facility which was

situated opposite the entrance of the Kingsway Campus. The Committee

was informed that the University commenced with registration of new and

returning students on 08 January 2018 and the long queues were as a result

of walk-ins. The University indicated that 97 percent of new applicants

applied online and the IT system was able to accommodate the high volume

of new applicants. The online registration took a maximum of 15 minutes.

There were no queues at the registration facility during the site visit of the

Committee as registration was nearing its closing date.



3.3.5.2 Cornerstone Residence

The Committee was informed that the Cornerstone Residence was formerly

known as Dromedaries. However, due to the renaming process, a number of

buildings at the University had been renamed as part of transformation. The

residence had 232 beds and accommodated male students, especially

undergraduates.

The Committee observed that the residence was old, however, it was

conducive for living and learning. There were minor refurbishments

required especially at the residence’s bathrooms. Students were not allowed

to cook inside their rooms since there were kitchens in each floor. The

University did not have a dining hall for students. The University had a

student centre with many cafes and restaurants were students could buy

their meals through Fundi card

The University did not allow students to bring alcohol inside the residence.

However, students requested management to apply for a liquor licence so

that alcohol can be sold on campus. Students complained that they were

being robbed at night and it was very risky to drink outside the campus. The

University indicated that it would consult on the matter.

3.3.5.3 Mošate Heights Residence

Mošate Heights residence was a female residence with 274 students.

However, during the site visit of the Committee there were 205 students as

the residence since registration was still underway. The Committee

observed that there were shower doors that laid outside the residence

premises. The University indicated that the renovations at residence started

in December 2017 when students were on vacation. However, the project

delayed and contractors were finalising the outstanding work which would

take a week to complete.

Students complained that they did not feel safe in using the showers without

doors. An example was given of a construction worker who peeped through

the window whilst a female student was using the shower. The Committee

expressed its concern about the delays in the maintenance work which also

compromised the safety of students. The Committee visited the rooms and

observed that students had covered the smoke detectors with plastics. They

indicated that the smoke from the hair dryer triggered the smoke alarm.



4. Observations

The Committee conducted an oversight visit to assess the implementation of

the Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher education by universities

and TVET Colleges; to assess the 2018 academic year admissions and

registration processes; to assess the administration of NSFAS funding; to

assess student performance in the 2017 academic year; to assess progress

made with regard to transformation; and the capacity of the institutions in

terms of infrastructure, in particular, student accommodation and teaching

and learning facilities.

The Committee having undertaken an oversight visit to Gauteng, made the

following observations:

4.1 2018 Registration

4.1.1 The Committee observed that the 2018 registration process at the

University of Pretoria commenced smoothly and over 90 percent of the new

applicants registered through the University’s online registration system.

The University had efficient systems in place to assist students with their

queries. However, the main concern raised by students was the lack of

accommodation to house students coming from other provinces.

4.1.2 At the University of Johannesburg, the Committee observed that the

2018 registration process also commenced smoothly with over 80 percent of

new applicants using the University’s online registration system. However,

the main challenge of the University was the delays by NSFAS to pay for

the registration of returning students. As a result, the University took a huge

financial risk by unblocking 12 000 returning students whilst waiting for

NSFAS to settle their outstanding debts.

4.1.3 The Committee was extremely concerned about the long queues it

observed during its site visit at UNISA. The queues were abnormal for a

long distance / non-contact institution, which predominantly utilises its

online system to register students. The Committee was informed that the

long queues were exacerbated by the eight (8) days lost at the beginning of

registration period due to industrial action. Furthermore, the inability of the

University’s ICT infrastructure to accommodate the high volumes of online

applications and registration simultaneously compounded the situation.



Nevertheless, the University was positive that it would assist all the students

that qualified to register regardless of its difficulties.

4.1.4 Unisa in its written response to the Committee indicated that the

closing date for registration had to be extended twice in response to the staff

strike, and the fact that the number of students who applied during the

applications window in 2018 exceeded all expectations. A total of 92 863

applications were received, of which 8 740 were incomplete. The University

undertook to apply enrolment management to limit possible negative effects

that extreme oversubscription would have on the operations of the

University. The University also undertook to be more disciplined in keeping

to cut-off dates and not allowing exceptions.

4.2 Roll-out of the NSFAS student-centred model

4.2.1 The general observation of the Committee is that there are challenges

pertaining to the roll out of the NSFAS student-centred model in

universities. Compounding the situation is the inability of NSFAS to

speedily resolve student queries since the new model is centralised and all

queries have to be directed to the head office in Cape Town. This created

frustrations amongst students whom some of them were owed outstanding

claims of 2017. As a result, they experienced challenges in registering for

the 2018 academic due to unsettled debts. The Committee also noted that all

the Universities were owed outstanding payment for 2017 by NSFAS.

4.2.2 Unisa in its written response to the Committee indicated that it was

owed R116 million by NSFAS for 2017. Moreover, the University has been

owed outstanding payments by NSFAS dating back from 2012 to 2016 and

that amount was R59.3 million. The total payment received from NSFAS

for 2018 without remittances amounted to R60 million.

4.2.3 The University of Pretoria in its written response to the Committee

indicated that NSFAS owed the University R50 million for 2017. Moreover,

the University was requested in 2017 to indicate all the Quantile 1,2,3

students, South Africa Social Security Agency (SASSA) grant recipients,

students on appeal and students who were still unfunded. According to

NSFAS, there were still 237 applications that were being processed and not

finalised. The impact of this was that at year-end 2017, R9.5 million was

owed by these students to the University.



4.2.4 The University of Johannesburg in its written response to the

Committee indicated that an amount of R54 million was owed by NSFAS

for the 2017 academic year. An upfront payment of R170 million had been

received with respect to the 2018 funding.

4.3 Implementation of fee-free higher education

4.3.1 The Committee noted that the Universities welcomed the Presidential

pronouncement of fee-free higher education. However, they were concerned

about the timing in which the pronouncement was made. The students

expressed their concerns about the confusing messages that were

communicated by the Department and NSFAS with regard the

implementation of this pronouncement.

4.4. Student housing

4.4.1 The general observation of the Committee is that universities were

unable to meet the growing demand for affordable and decent student

accommodation. Compounding the situation was the lack of affordable off-

campus residential properties in urbanised cities such as Johannesburg

making it difficult for students coming from other provinces. Likewise, the

universities alluded that they had limited resources to build more residences

due inadequate infrastructure grants from the DHET.

4.4.2 The University of Pretoria in its written response to the Committee

indicated that it had sufficient land on which to build new residences, but

lacked funds to do so. The provincial land and vacant buildings that were

located far away from the University campuses created logistical challenges

for students who may be accommodated there, especially in terms of

commuting to and from the University.

4.5. Infrastructure development

4.5.1 The Universities have indicated a serious challenge with the

maintenance backlog. This was mainly caused by insufficient funds to

address the challenge.



4.6 Academic performance

4.6.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the overall undergraduate

throughput rates which were low and dropout rates which were high. Of

great concern to note was the high dropout rate at UNISA which was higher

than the national norm. The Universities undertook to put measures in place

to ensure that students were able to complete their programmes within the

regulation time so that they can exit the system with their qualifications.

4.7 A single national bargaining forum for higher education

4.7.1 The unions made a plea to the Committee to have a single national

bargaining forum for the higher education sector. NEHAWU at the

University of Johannesburg indicated that the majority of Vice-Chancellors

were not keen to such a forum.

4.8 Harmonisation of conditions of service of insourced workers

4.8.1 Unions at all the three Universities indicated that the Universities have

insourced the workers who previously worked for private companies.

However, the conditions of services were not harmonized.

4.9 Transformation

4.9.1 Unions at all the institutions complained about the slow pace of

transformation and inadequate representation of blacks, women and people

with disabilities at the senior management level. At the University of

Johannesburg, unions complained about the appointment foreign nationals

at the expense of the South African Blacks. Both students and unions raised

a concern about the lack of transformation in the procurement of goods and

services in the Universities, where previously advantaged companies were

procured to provide services at the expense of black empowerment.

4.10 Other observations

4.10.1 University of South Africa (UNISA)

4.10.1.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the

delivery of study materials by UNISA to 244 students and some of them had

dropped-out of the system. It emerged that the University had inadequate



capacity and 72 vacant positions in the study materials section. The

University in its written response to the Committee indicated that a variety

of measures impacted on the academic programme in the first semester of

2017, which included; inadequate forecasting data and stock planning

capacity, and unprecedented growth in the number of students in specific

modules. The late submission of study material content from lecturers,

challenges with the ICT systems, incorrect student addresses and

fragmentation of processes compounded the situation.

4.10.1.2 The Committee expressed concerns about the alleged racism at the

University. The Committee welcomed the plan by the South African Human

Rights Commission to investigate the allegations at UNISA and also urged

the University to provide feedback.

4.10.1.3 The relationship between the University stakeholders and

management at UNISA was noted as a concern. The Committee also

expressed a concern about the inadequate communication that existed at the

institution which contributed to instabilities.

4.10.1.4 The Committee condemned the locking of staff members inside a

building by angry students at the UNISA’s Durban Campus due to

challenges with the 2018 registration process.

4.101.5 The Committee commended the open distance learning system of

the University, but raised concerns about the lack of response by staff

members to student queries and unavailability of staff to answer telephone

enquiries. It was concerning that even turn-around time of 48 hours to

respond to queries was not adhered to. The Committee urged the unions to

ensure their members are attending to students needs and are accessible on

their emails and telephonically.

4.10.1.6 The reported shortfall of R600 million in the subsidy and its impact

to the University was noted as a concern.

4.10.1.7 The Committee expressed a concern about the inability of the

University’s inadequate ICT systems. The University in its written response

to the Committee acknowledged that it experienced a high volume of

applications combined with high levels of transactions and concurrent



requests, which led to abnormally high traffic levels which caused a

degradation in system performance. However, the University’s vision for

ICT systems is to make myUnisa less dependent on the student system for

teaching functions and locate myUnisa on a scalable platform that can

respond to varying levels of demand without the constraints and limitation

of the current infrastructure environment.

4.10.1.8 The Committee noted the concerns raised by the University

stakeholders about its relationship with PURCO. The University indicated

that PURCO members included all South African universities including

TVET colleges. PURCO also focused on providing maximum benefits for

its members through collaborative purchasing and professional support.

Moreover, the University’s engagement with PURCO formed a small part

of its supply chain management.

4.10.2. University of Pretoria

4.10.2.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the declining income

from investments as well as diminishing surplus at the University of Pretoria.

The University acknowledged that it was experiencing financial constraints

similar to other higher education institutions and this also contributed to the

freezing of administrative posts. Moreover, the University indicated that it

had financial reserves that could keep the University operations ongoing for a

period of one (1) year three months in case of emergency.

4.10.2.2 The University of Pretoria had a very good infrastructure

maintenance plan for its student residences and the overall infrastructure of

the University. The University’s infrastructure was found to be in a very

good condition and well maintained. The Committee expressed a view that

other historically disadvantaged institutions (HDIs) could learn from the

University’s management and maintenance of infrastructure.

4.10.2.3 The Committee was concerned about the disconnect between

middle and the executive management.

4.10.2.4 The Committee noted a request from students for social housing.

The students indicated that the City of Tshwane introduced affordable

housing for poor people and that can be done for students.



4.10.2.5 The Committee expressed a concern about the alleged exclusive

residences at the University. In its written response to the Committee, the

University indicated that it was committed to transformation and was

against all forms of discrimination. While the numbers for 2018 had not

been finalised, 67.86 percent of students who had already been admitted to

residences were black and 56 percent were undergraduates and 97 percent

postgraduates. However, the percentages varied per campus.

4.10.3 University of Johannesburg

4.10.3.1 The Committee expressed a concern pertaining to the request by

students at the University of Johannesburg for the institution to apply for a

liquor licence at one of the male residence since universities are spaces for

teaching and learning. The University in its written response to the

Committee indicated that its student centres had service providers licensed

to sell alcohol to students within specific times, especially on Fridays

(14:00 – 22:00) and Saturdays (10:00 – 13:00).

4.10.3.2 The Committee enquired about widespread media reports pertaining

the siphoning of R25 million from the University of Johannesburg (UJ)

accounts and this happened over a period of three years. The University

indicated that the corruption scandal involved the DVC for Finance,

Chairperson of Convocation who did business without declaring his interests

and the Chairperson of Council. The fraudulent activities happened in the

commercialisation space of the University. The University had established

Photovoltaic Technology Intellectual Property (PTiP), a Stellenbosch based

company with the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) to develop solar

panels. An additional company was established and its directors were UJ

managers who channeled money from the UJ company to their own

company. The University undertook a forensic investigation into the matter

and the report was concluded. The Chairperson of Council subsequently

resigned and the DVC for Finance was dismissed. The University was in the

process of laying criminal charges against the individuals and aimed at

recouping some of the money lost by the institution.

4.10.3.3 The Committee was concerned about the internal control systems

of the institution which could not detect the fraudulent activities which took

place over a period of three years. The Committee enquired about the

strengthening of the internal controls and the recouping of the money. The



University undertook to improve its internal control systems to prevent this

incident from recurring. One of the measures to strengthen internal control

was to have annual reports of commercialisation tabled to Council. The

Committee requested that progress reports on the investigations and

disciplinary outcomes to be forwarded to Parliament.

4.10.3.4 The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the

completion of the renovation of residences and the safety of students during

the renovation process. The University indicated that the maintenance work

took longer than scheduled, however, the contractor undertook to complete

the outstanding work in a week’s time.

4.10.3.5 The Committee noted a plea by the University to have a national

tracking system which would trace mobility of learners from the primary to

post-school education and training and to the world of work. The envisaged

system would provide relevant and reliable information for planning and

policy frameworks.

4.10.3.6. The Committee was concerned about low admission numbers of

students with NC(V) and Report 191 qualifications.

4.10.3.7 The allegations of irregularities in the remuneration of staff at

similar job level was noted as a concern by the Committee. The University

in its written response to the Committee indicated that the remuneration

policy of the institution ensured fair and equitable remuneration practices.

Moreover, individual remuneration was also affected by the years of service

that the employee had, the skills set that the employee brought to the

position and the knowledge (qualification) of the employee.

5. Summary

In summary, the 2018 academic year has commenced smoothly at the

institutions visited by the Committee except for the disruptions at UNISA as

a result of industrial action which lasted for eight (8) days. In so far as the

2018 registration process is concerned, the Committee commended the

institutions for the systems in place to register the first-time entering and

returning students including walk-ins for the 2018 academic year. However,

UNISA was the only institution that experienced difficulties with the 2018



registration process due to its ICT systems which was unable to

accommodate the high volumes of applications. The Committee was also

pleased that over 80 percent of the new applicants at the institutions visited

was done through online registration, and there were no reported cases of

stampedes or fatalities during the registration period.

Notwithstanding the important role that NSFAS plays in offering access to

higher education for academically deserving poor students, the Committee

received complaints from the student representative councils (SRCs)

regarding the roll-out of NSFAS student-centred model. The complaints

were related to the delays by NSFAS in the payment of allowances to

eligible students and the impact this had on teaching and learning.

Moreover, the students expressed their frustrations about the poor

communication between NSFAS and the institutions which created

confusion. The Committee expressed the view that NSFAS should work

closely with the institutions to resolve the systemic challenges so that

institutions can be paid all the outstanding claims to prevent academic

exclusions of academically deserving students.

In so far as student accommodation is concerned, the Committee found that

the provision of student accommodation far exceeded the supply, with just

under 30 percent of the full time contact students enrolled at UJ and UP

housed in the university’s student accommodation or residences. Moreover,

the students at UNISA also demanded the University to make provision for

student accommodation given the high number of undergraduate students

who register at the institution. Meanwhile, UNISA was adamant that it is a

distance learning institution which predominantly offers courses/

programmes that are available online and there is no need to make provision

for student housing.

In relation to the overall student performance, the undergraduate success

rate of students was averaging above 80 percent, which is the national norm

for higher education. However, the completion of undergraduate

programmes within the minimum time (3 years) still remains a major

concern for universities. Moreover, the dropout rate of undergraduate

students also remains a challenge. It is apparent that whilst many students



are passing their programmes, the number of those completing on time

remains low. The Committee expressed a view that universities should

improve their student support services to minimise the bottlenecks within

the system.

6. Recommendations


conducted an oversight visit to the University of South Africa (UNISA),

University of Pretoria (UP) and University of Johannesburg (UJ),

recommends that the Minister of Higher Education and Training consider

the following:

6.1 Registration 2018

6.1.1 Notwithstanding the successful 2018 registration process at UP and

UJ, the Committee was concerned about the long queues of students that

were awaiting to register at UNISA due to the failure of the online

registration system to cater for the high volumes of new applicants and the

impact of the industrial action. The Committee recommends that UNISA

resolve the ICT related challenges to enable more eligible students to

register for the 2018 academic year.

6.2 Roll out of the NSFAS student-centred model

6.2.1 The Committee received complaints pertaining the roll-out of NSFAS

student-centred model. The complaints were related to the delays by

NSFAS in the payment of allowances due to eligible students. The

Committee recommends that the information technology (IT) systems of

universities should be integrated with NSFAS IT systems. Moreover,

NSFAS should improve its capacity so that it can speedily resolve student

queries.

6.2.2 NSFAS should develop clear guidelines pertaining the roll out of the

student centred model and communicate more effectively with the

institutions to prevent confusion. Moreover, the universities should embark

on an advocacy campaign to promote the importance of signing loan

agreement forms and schedule of particulars (LAFSOP) by students so that

their claims can be processed timeously.



6.3 Academic performance

6.3.1 The low throughput rate of students in undergraduate programmes and

the high dropout rate remains a challenge in higher education. The

Committee recommends that universities enhance their student support

systems to improve the retention and throughput rates of undergraduate

students.

6.4 Student housing

6.4.1 The shortage of decent, accessible, affordable and safe student

accommodation remains a challenge in higher education. The Committee

will confer with the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements to discuss a

way forward in the provision of student housing in higher education.

6.5 Transformation

6.5.1 The Committee noted the progress that has been made in transforming

the student body at UP and UJ. Notwithstanding the high number of black

African students at these institutions, the number of black academics

remains a concern. The Committee recommends that more support be given

to develop and retain young and emerging black academics.

6.6 Other recommendations

6.6.1 Establishment of a national bargaining forum for higher education:

The Committee noted the proposal by the unions for the establishment of a

bargaining forum for higher education. The Committee will confer with the

Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration to find a way

forward on this matter.

6.6.2 Allegations of mismanagement and corruption: There were reported

cases of mismanagement and corruption at UNISA and UJ. The Committee

recommends that the institutions continuously submit updated reports on the

developments with the investigations pertaining to corruption and

mismanagement.

6.6.3 The Committee continues to do oversight over UNISA and the

University should brief the Committee on progress made in implementing

the Committee’s oversight visit recommendations.

Report to be considered.



2. REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON ITS OVERSIGHT VISIT TO THE EASTERN CAPE, DATED 14 MARCH 2018


conducted an oversight visit to the post-school education and training

institutions in the Eastern Cape on 23 – 26 January 2018, reports as follows.

1. Delegation list

1.1 Members of the Committee

Hon D Kekana (ANC), Hon R Mavunda (ANC), Hon S Mchunu (ANC),

Hon C September: Chairperson (ANC), Hon M Wolmarans (ANC), Hon B

Bozzoli (DA) and Hon H Bucwa (DA).

1.2 Support staff

Mr A Kabingesi: Committee Secretary, Ms M Modiba: Content Adviser, Mr

L Ben: Committee Assistant and Ms F Lombard: Parliamentary

Communications Officer.

2. Introduction and background

In pursuance of its constitutional oversight obligation, the Committee

undertook an oversight visit to the Walter Sisulu University (WSU), King

Sabatha Dalindyebo Technical and Vocational Education and Training

(TVET) college, University of Fort Hare (UFH) and Buffalo City TVET

college.

The objectives of the oversight visit were to:

• Assess the 2018 registration process;

• Assess the preparedness of the institutions in implementing the 2018

academic programmes;

• Assess the 2017 overall academic performance of students; and

• Undertake site visits to infrastructure projects, student

accommodation and registration facilities.



In addition to the afore-mentioned objectives of the oversight visit, the

Committee engaged with the relevant stakeholders of each institution which

included: student representative council; labour unions and council.

3. Site visits and summary of the presentations

3.1. Walter Sisulu University (WSU)

3.1.1. Site visits

(a) Zamukulungisa Campus

(i) Great Hall

The Zamukulungisa Campus is one of the three teaching sites of the

University situated in Mthatha, which specialises in education and

commerce related programmes. The campus used to be the former Transkei

College of Education and it has 3 000 students registered in education and

commerce programmes.

The Committee visited the Great hall where the registration of first-time

entering and returning students took place. The campus-based registration

process for first time entering students commenced on 22 January 2018, and

registration for returning students was planned to commence on the of

29 January 2018. The University indicated that the registration process was

running smoothly with no major hiccups or overcrowding.

The hall was used as a one-stop shop where there were different units

providing services to students. The stations included: academic unit, which

provided guidance on module selection; NSFAS and financial assistance

and clearance; registration unit; student housing allocation unit and student

card issuance unit.

(ii) Block M Student Residence

The Committee undertook a site visit to the Block M student residence. The

Committee was informed that overcrowding and insufficient beds remained

a serious challenge at this residence. The Zamukulungisa Campus had a

total of 720 beds for 3 000 students. The Committee observed that there was

maintenance work that had not been completed at this residence.

Management indicated that the maintenance work was undertaken only



when students were on vacation and it was difficult to get contractors to

work during the December holidays. However, the maintenance work would

be completed before students return for the 2018 academic year. The

Committee was also informed about the huge maintenance backlog at the

University and insufficient funding to address the challenges.

(b) Nelson Mandela Drive Campus

(i) Great Hall

At the Nelson Mandela Drive Campus, the Committee started the site visit

with the Great Hall, where registration of the first entering students was

underway. All the units were present in the Hall so that students could

complete registration process and be issued with student cards and

accommodation. The University informed the Committee that there were

many enquiries on the week of the 15th January 2018. The University also

noted that its online registration system was piloted in 2015 and it would be

fully implemented in the 2019 academic year.

(ii) Lecture rooms

The Committee visited the lecture rooms and observed that they were not in

a good state, and needed major refurbishments. The University reported that

the architecture of the buildings was poorly designed. The furniture in some

of the lecture rooms was worn out and broken, and the roofs were leaking.

The observation of the Committee was that the learning conditions of

students at these lecture rooms seemed to be sub-standard.

The University indicated that it had a maintenance backlog estimated at

R3.4 billion based on the 2014 estimations. The deteriorating infrastructure

contributed to the de-accreditation of some of the institutions key academic

deliveries such as the Bachelor of Social Work and the Bachelor of Law

(LLB) programme. The University also reported theft of overhead

projectors from the lecture halls as a major concern.

(iii) Decant Residence

The Decant Residence was one of the latest student residence to be built at

the NMD campus, established in 2015. The estimated costs to build the



residence amounted to R50 million and it had a capacity of 240 beds. The

facilities at this residence were new, however, they were not properly

maintained and were deteriorating at a faster rate. Fumigation was only

implemented once a year and the building had lots of cockroaches and

spiders. The University also reported lack of student recreational facilities at

the Campus. There was only one tennis court and a stadium to cater for

9 000 students. The tennis court was not properly maintained.

(iv) Iphulo Residence

The Committee was shocked to discover that the residence had occupants

who allocated themselves rooms without the knowledge of the residence

manager. The Committee was informed that most of the occupants were

illegal and included mostly prospective students who were in the process of

applying for admission for the 2018 academic year. The majority of the

occupants were squatting in single rooms and up to three occupants shared a

single room. Some of the occupants who interacted with members of the

Committee indicated that they came from very far places in the Eastern

Cape and could not afford to go back home without receiving a feedback

about their admission status.

The Committee observed that there was no access control at the residence

and this compounded the overcrowding situation at the residence.

The Committee discovered that the residence was in a very bad state which

was not conducive for living and learning. The rooms were dirty with

broken furniture, windows and door handles. There was no security at the

residence and this resulted in many illegal activities such as, drinking and

smoking of dagga within the residence premises. Some of the illegal

occupants operated tuck shops inside the residence without the approval of

the institution. It seemed that management was not aware about the presence

of unregistered students and the extent of squatting in the residence rooms.

(v) Faculty of Health Sciences Building

The Faculty of Health Sciences building was a state of the art building

which was recently completed in the 2017 academic year. The building was

conveniently located next to the Nelson Mandela Academic Hospital which



made it easier for medical students to access their practical lessons. The

building also hosted the meeting of the Portfolio Committee with

management and other stakeholders of the University. The Committee was

impressed about the state of the building and its modern facilities.

3.1.2. Student Representative Council

The SRC welcomed the opportunity to present to the Portfolio Committee the

challenges that were affecting students at the University. The presentation

mainly highlighted the challenges of students with regard to: 2018

registration; student accommodation, infrastructure and student funding.

The SRC expressed a concern about the delays associated with the 2018

registration process at University. The SRC indicated that the University had

available spaces for 7 300 first time entering students. However, as at

23 January 2018, there were 4 700 new students registered, and the

University was not providing updates to the new applicants on the status of

their applications. Compounding the situation was that management informed

the returning students that they had to pay 25 percent of their debt before they

could be allowed to register. The SRC was concern about this directive since

the majority of the students at the University came from very poor family

households and were not in a position to pay their outstanding debts.

In relation to infrastructure and student housing, the SRC was extremely

concerned about the state of student residences and other facilities

especially at the Nelson Mandela Drive Campus. The SRC indicated that

some of the student residences were hazardous and not meeting the DHET

minimum norms and standards for student housing. Moreover, the safety

and security of students at the NMD student residences was compromised

due to the absence of access control. The SRC expressed a concern about

the increase in student deaths at the University’s residences owing to

violence and poor security. Management also terminated the security

contract at the end of November 2017 and there was no clarity about the

procurement of new security services for the 2018 academic year. The SRC

indicated that it was not consulted by management on procurement of the

University’s security services. The SRC also reported the lack of

recreational facilities, dining halls as well as health services facilities for

students.



With regard to student funding, the SRC was extremely concerned about the

delays by NSFAS in paying allowances due to students. The SRC indicated

that the students who had claims that had not been paid by NSFAS were not

allowed to register for the 2018 academic year. Moreover, the

implementation of the new student-centred model had created lots of

frustration amongst the students. Some of the students did not sign the loan

agreement forms and schedule of particulars (LAFSOP) since they did not

receive the communication or sms. Some students had unpaid claims from

2016 and were not assisted by NSFAS for two consecutive academic years.

The SRC also reported that claims for the historic debt for some students

who have signed debt acknowledgement forms have not been paid.

3.1.3 Labour Unions: The National Education and Health Allied

Workers Union (NEHAWU) and the National Tertiary Education

Educators Union (NTEU)

Lack of or poor communication: The unions indicated that there was poor

communication between management and the stakeholders at the

University. The University was experiencing student protests on two

campuses, however, the unions were not informed about the students’

complaints. The unions were only invited for engagement with management

when the student protests were out of control, and by that time, most of the

staff members would be out of reach.

The unions indicated that the mode of communication used by management

to staff during strikes was emails only, and most of the staff members did

not have access to emails when they were outside of campus precincts. The

utilisation of bulk SMS services to communicate with staff members had

been suggested by the unions to management; however, it was never

implemented. Management had also failed to meet with the unions on

several occasions to engage on important matters that affect staff members.

Quality issues: The unions indicated that the conditions of the lecture halls

at the University were extremely bad (lack of air-conditioners, broken

chairs, no plugs, inadequate lighting, and leaking roofs) and not conducive

to effective teaching and learning and compromised the quality of

education. This also contributed to the de-accreditation of the Bachelor of

Social Work and LLB programmes, and may cost the University more of its

programmes in the future.



Lack of transparency and accountability: The unions said that

management failed to adhere to some of its policies with regard to the

remuneration of the executive management and the consultation process

regarding policy development was inconsistent. Management also failed to

report timeously to the University community on progress of projects

undertaken which were funded by the DHET.

Inefficiency of the senior management: The unions indicated that some of

the members of the senior management were not decisive on critical matters

which required urgent decision-making, thus causing matters that could

have been contained at campus level to escalate, and at times taken to the

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA).

Non-finalisation of the harmonisation process: The unions indicated that

workers at the University still have different conditions of service that were

inherited from the merger process in 2005. The harmonisation of conditions

of service process had been very slow.

Lack of academic organogram: It was reported that the University did not

have an academic organogram and staff members were offered voluntary

severance packages before the structure could be developed and

implemented.

3.1.4. Management

Prof R Midgley: Vice-Chancellor made the presentation. The VC gave a

brief background of WSU and indicated that the University of Transkei,

Border Technikon and Eastern Cape Technikon merged in June 2005 to

establish the Walter Sisulu University. WSU had four campuses located in

Queenstown, Buffalo City, Butterworth and Mthatha and the area covered

1 000 Kilometre radius in four district municipalities.

In so far as the student population is concerned, the VC said that the

University had a student population of 30 791 students across all the four

campuses with 2 500 employees (1 500 permanent) in 2017. The total

student population was made up of 17 212 female students and 13 290

males. In relation to finances, the VC indicated that the University had an

operating budget of R1.7 billion and R685 million of the total budget was



allocated from government subsidy and R568 million was from student fees.

The University produced 4 800 graduates in 2015 and this increased to

5 801 graduates in 2017.

With regard to the 2018 student registration/enrolment, the VC indicated

that the total enrolment target for the 2018 first-time entering students was

7 300. However, the University received 43 471 applications for 2018,

including walk-ins. The registration at the University was undertaken at

seven venues on four campuses. The returning students and postgraduates

registered online whilst the first-time entering undergraduate students would

register manually. The VC said that the planning for the 2018 registration

process was a success.

In relation to student accommodation, the VC said that the national norms

for a rural based University was 30 percent of the student population being

placed in student residences. However, the University’s target was to have

60 percent of its student population in residences, although the ideal target

was 80 percent. Moreover, the construction of two new residences in

Mthatha and Butterworth for approximately 250 additional beds will

commence in 2018. The procurement of private residences went through the

accreditation process with the SRC being involved in site inspections.

With regard to infrastructure, the VC indicated that the total institutional

budget for repairs and maintenance in 2017 amounted to R13.8 million.

This represented 0.27 percent of the 2013 built cost estimates and the

internationally accepted norm for keeping buildings in good order is

1.8 percent. The University had assets worth an estimated R5 billion as per

assessment done in 2013.

The VC indicated that the key challenges of the University included but not

limited to: poor student living and learning conditions; shortage of up to

18 000 beds which resulted in massive overcrowding; large maintenance

backlog; poor recreational facilities; inadequate safety and security of

students and staff; violent student protests; divisional management model;

poor performance management; transforming the institutional culture and

reputational damage; de-accreditation of the Bachelor of Social Work

(BSW) and Bachelor of Law (LLB) programmes; financial sustainability

and administrative stability.



The VC emphasised that the University had an important role to contribute

to society and some of its key successes included: good and stable council

with committed members; good relations with stakeholders and

improvement in staff morale; some strong academic programmes;

improvements in pass rates; improving research culture; strong community

engagements programmes; introduction of online registration in 2018;

infrastructure developments and expansion of the Queenstown Campus.

3.2. King Sabatha Dalindyebo (KSD) TVET College

3.2.1. Site visits

(i) Utility Hall

The Committee visited the Utility hall where the registration of students was

undertaken. The registration process included; capturing of student data,

issuance of student cards and allocation of financial assistance. The college

reported that the 2018 registration process would be closed on 26 January

2018. However, the college was experiencing a challenge whereby students

who were rejected at Walter Sisulu University would come to register at the

college after closure of the registration date. Similarly, other students that

were already registered at the college would immediately leave the college

once they get confirmation of acceptance at WSU.

The college reported that it utilised its admission criteria for admission of

students into various academic programmes and classes had already started

on 15 January 2018 for other programmes. The college indicated that it

experienced a challenge whereby students who passed Grade 12 would

enroll for National Certificate Vocational NC(V), and later on change to

enroll for Report 191 programmes due to lack of career guidance. This

contributed to high dropout rate in the NC(V) Level 2 programmes.

(ii) Workshops

The Committee visited the workshops to assess their state in providing

practical experience to students. During the time of the visit, the National

Skills Fund (NSF) funded apprenticeship programme was underway. The

college reported that the apprenticeship programme enrolled 90 learners

who had completed their NC(V) and Report 191 programmes in plumbing,

bricklaying, engineering and carpentry. The learners were enrolled for a

period of 36 months and would be trained as artisans in various trades.



The college indicated that it collaborated with various Sector Education and

Training Authorities (SETAs) who were providing guidelines for the

training programmes. The Manufacturing, Engineering and Other Services

SETA (MERSETA) was providing guidelines and modules for the training

of motor mechanics and electricians. The Construction SETA was used in

the civil engineering training programme.

The college indicated that the training programme offered six months of

theoretical training and the other part involved practical training and

workplace exposure. The six months theoretical training involved basic

workshop behaviour, health and safety rules and other theory-related

programmes. Towards the end of the programme, learners were offered pre-

trade test by the college so that they could be ready for trade test

assessment. The college aimed to assist all the 90 learners/apprentices to

become qualified artisans.

The college indicated that it had partnerships with various companies within

the OR Tambo District for student work placement. However, it

experienced a challenge in placing learners into workplaces due to the

limited presence of industry in the Mthatha area. The students that were

placed into workplaces were offered practical work exposure in various

trades. There were many RDP houses that were being built in the OR

Tambo district, and some of the learners were conducting their practical

learning at these sites. The college also collaborated with AB350 bus

company for learners to be exposed to motor mechanics.

(iii) Electrical workshop

The Committee visited the electrical workshop where the practical training

of NC(V) and Report 191 electrical engineering students was undertaken.

The workshop had the latest electrical equipment that was donated by

Eskom. The college was able to train eight (8) of its lecturers at the

workshop to become qualified artisans.

(iv) Carpentry workshop

The college indicated that the workshop was utilised for the training of

students enrolled in the carpentry programme. The learners were trained in



making roof thrust, ceilings, tables and other carpentry work. The college

procured its timber for the practical training of learners from hardware

stores. The Committee advised the college management to explore working

with the Department of Water and Sanitation’s Working for Water project

to access timber from alien trees for practical training.

The college management informed the Committee about the challenges they

experience with electricity supply at the campus. The college bought a

generator, however, it was small and not able to supply power to all the

workshops and computers labs. The college was in the process of procuring

providers to install new generators. The Committee urged the college

management to explore the use of solar energy.

(v) Student residences

The Committee visited the “old boys” hostel which had 72 rooms. The

Committee was informed that most of the students had not been allocated

rooms for the 2018 academic year. However, the Committee discovered that

there were students who had occupied some rooms without proof of

registration.

The Committee also visited the new residence which had a capacity of

accommodating an additional 1000 students. The college reported that the

construction of the residences commenced in 2008. However, the

construction was interrupted by mismanagement of funds and non-payment

of service providers. The residence was unutilised until the National Skills

Fund (NSF) intervened in 2017 and allocated R60 million for

refurbishments. The refurbishments of the residence commenced in April

2017 and completion was expected by the end of April 2018. The new

residence had rooms that could take up to four (4) beds and there was a TV

room, ablution facilities and kitchenettes at each of the floor.


In relation to the 2018 registration process, the SRC expressed a concern

about the capping of enrolment numbers at the backdrop of the Presidential

announcement of fee free higher education for the poor and working class.

The SRC indicated that this frustrated many prospective students who



wanted access to post-school education and training opportunities. Students

were concerned that management was not willing to explain how free

education for poor students would be implemented.

The SRC indicated that the challenges experienced by students at the

college included: inadequate industry at the OR Tambo District for work-

integrated learning and many exiting level students were frustrated by the

lack of employment opportunities; inadequate implementation of the code

of conduct by the college; delays by NSFAS in the payment of outstanding

allowances to students which contributed to high student drop-out and the

delays in the issuance of outstanding certificates which affects student

progression.

In relation to student accommodation, the SRC expressed a concern about

the monthly rental fee of R500 charged to students by the college since the

majority of them came from very poor family households which were

surviving on social grants. The SRC further stated that the student

residences were poorly maintained, although students paid monthly rental

fees. They proposed that the monthly rental fee be reduced to R400 due to

the poor standard of the residences.

3.2.3 Labour Unions

3.2.3.1. Public Service Association (PSA), National Parastatal and

Tertiary Organisation of South Africa (NAPTOSA) and South African

Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU)

The three unions made a consolidated presentation. In relation to the 2018

registration, the unions were concerned about the poor applications system

used by the college for admission of students. The unions indicated that

the manual applications system was outdated and contributed to the

disappearance of application forms. Furthermore, it created more work for

staff who must later capture the student data into the system. The college

had inadequate storage for student files and the registration team was

under-staffed.



With regard to the 2017 academic performance, the unions were concerned

about the delays in the release of results by the Department. The unions

indicated that they were not in a position to comment fully on the

performance of the college for the 2017 academic year as there were

supplementary exams and pending results that were not finalised. The

unions said that the leakage of examination papers caused frustrations,

especially on lecturers and students since it delayed the release of results.

The unions indicated that the challenges experienced by staff included:

insufficient classrooms, workshops, simulation rooms and furniture;

insufficient toner and printers; inadequate working tools for lecturers; lack

of electricity back-up system; shortage of parking for staff and lack of

provision of water when there is no water.

3.2.3.2 National Education and Health Allied Workers Union

(NEHAWU)

In relation to working condition, the union was concerned that the Mthatha

Campus lecture theatres had no electricity and lecturers were expected to

work under those abnormal conditions. Moreover, some of the lecturers did

not have laptops as well as desktop computers. However, they were required

to capture student marks and assessments.

The union said that the college experienced a challenge of inadequate

infrastructure. Some of the campuses were situated in rural areas and did not

have decent ablution facilities. At Ntabozuka Campus, the classrooms,

computer laboratories and staff rooms did not have air conditioners and this

affected teaching and learning.

With regard to staff shortage, the union said that there was a shortage of

general assistants and administrative personnel. Some of the employees

were doing work beyond their job description due to shortage of staff, and

when vacant positions were advertised, they were not shortlisted.

The union expressed a concern about the communication channels used by

the college management which were ineffective. The unions were not given

feedback on key strategic decisions taken by management. The employees

of the college were not aware about the strategic plan of the college.



The union indicated that employees at the college experienced challenges

with their employment benefits since migration of colleges to the

Department of Higher Education and Training. Employees were concerned

about the delays in the finalization of their employment benefits by the

Department.

3.2.4. Management

The presentation was made by the college principal, Mr C Ndodana. The

Principal gave a brief background of the college by indicating that the KSD

TVET college was located in the OR District Municipality. The college was

strategically positioned to serve the most rural areas of the Eastern Cape,

covering three districts, namely: OR Tambo; Amathole and Chris Hani

District. The college served 28 percent of the Eastern Cape’s total

population. The college was constituted of the following campuses: Libode;

Mthatha; Mapuzi; Mngazi; Ngcobo; Ntabozuko and Zimbane. The KSD

TVET college was established through the merger of three former technical

colleges, namely: Mapuzi; Mthatha and Ngcobo in 2002. The central

administration offices of the college were situated at the Mthatha Campus.

In relation to infrastructure, the Principal indicated that the outlying college

campuses lacked adequate infrastructure facilities to provide quality

technical and vocational programmes to equip young people from these

areas to compete fairly in the job market. The Mthatha Campus had 152

students occupying its student residences and there were new hostels under

construction which would add an additional 1000 beds.

With regard to the 2017 student academic performance, the Principal

indicated that the overall college NC(V) pass rate was 76 percent and the

certification rate stood at 36 percent. For the Report 191 Business studies,

the progression rate was 74 percent and the certification rate was 47 percent.

For Report 191 Engineering N1-N3, the progression rate was 56 percent and

the certification rate was 36 percent. For Report 191 Engineering N4-N6,

the progression rate was 60 percent and the certification rate stood at

39 percent. The college’s overall NC(V) certification rate was 36 percent,

retention rate 87 percent, pass rate 75 percent and throughput rate

31 percent.



In relation to finances, the Principal indicated that the college had been

receiving disclaimers since 2015 due to poor financial management.

However, for the 2017 financial year, the college received a qualified audit

opinion with findings. In this regard, management had taken some measures

to address the findings and to ensure that they do not recur. The college had

cash reserves which amounted to R7 million. However, the college

projected an overspending on compensation of employees’ persal budget.

The Principal indicated that the Department had deducted R944 000 from

the last tranche as a claw back on the projected deficit. In addition to the

persal deficit, the college had 19 vacant posts which cost at R6.4 million.

These posts could not be filled due to the 63 percent threshold on

compensation costs.

The Principal indicated that the provisional indicative allocation for 2017/18

from the Department amounted to R197 million (R113.4 million for

compensation of employees, R41.3 million college transfer and R42.572

million as 20 percent NSFAS bursaries) leaving a deficit of R45 million.

For the 2018 academic year, the college had a planned full-time equivalent

(FTEs) of 5 781 students, of which 4 691 FTEs were funded and 1 098

remained unfunded. As a result, the college decided to maintain the 2017

enrolment numbers in order to decrease the number of unfunded students

and the resultant deficit.

3.3. University of Fort Hare

3.3.1. Site visits

(i) Sport Complex

The University reported that the University’s Sport Complex was used as a

registration facility for the 2018 academic year. For the first time in 2018,

the University utilised an online registration system for students, which

made registration easier and more efficient. The Committee was informed

that approximately 300 students could register in just five (5) minutes.

However, there were other academic programmes that were not yet online,

and students were assisted to register manually for these programmes.



The registration facility had various sections which included: residence

desk; international relations desk; financial aid desk (NSFAS and private

sponsors); printing of student cards, ICT to assist with IT related challenges

and Xerox printers support; basic computer literacy programme for first

year entering students; and Gender-Base Violence desk. The University

indicated that it had not experienced any challenges with the 2018

registration process. In dealing with walk-ins, the University reported that it

established its own clearing house system whereby walk-ins would register

and be put on the waiting list for available programmes. The University

received 42 000 applications for the 2018 academic year, and it could only

admit 2 404 new students. The University could only accept walk-ins in the

Faculty of Agriculture and Commerce.

(ii) Student Centre

The University indicated that the student centre was a central gathering

point for students where they could socialize and participate in other student

activities. The student centre housed the SRC offices, student societies, and

other facilities such as the tuck shop and bookstore.

(iii) Cricket South Africa (CSA) Centre of Excellence

The Committee was informed that the CSA Centre of Excellence was an

investment by CSA to develop and expand the talent in cricket and the

University was a chosen site to host the centre. The University indicated

that it did not incur any financial loss by hosting the centre and the

maintenance of the centre was the responsibility of CSA as well the staff

working in the centre. CSA planned to invest R15 million to make further

upgrades of the facility and add a conference and dining hall facility, and to

expand the fields. The students that were part of the CSA programme had

their own dedicated residences within the campus and others were enrolled

in the nearby institutions.

(iv) Water reservoir

The Committee was informed that the bulk water reservoir was a back-up

system used by the University to alleviate the challenge of water shortage in

Alice. The reservoir could assist the University with a backup water supply



for up to 72 hours in case there was no water supply from the municipality.

The University invested R8.5 million into the bulk water reservoir project

because water shortages were experienced due to the expansion of

residential areas nearby the University and poor municipal water

infrastructure. The University indicated that the underground infrastructure

in the area remained a serious concern.

(v) Stag African Student Residence

The University indicated that the Stag African student housing project was

aimed at alleviating the shortage of student accommodation at the

University. The University aimed at constructing 17 student residence

blocks that could take up to 2 406 beds. Five (5) student blocks had already

been constructed and were in a very good state. The construction of the new

residences adhered to the Department of Higher Education and Training’s

Policy on the Minimum Norms and Standard for Student Housing. The

project was interrupted by challenges with the tender processes, which were

resolved by courts of law. However, the University reached an agreement

with Stag African to be a service provider to construct the remaining student

residences until the project was completed.

The residence was fitted with a biometric access control system to prevent

outsiders from entering the residence. The Committee was informed that

students were against the biometric system because they wanted to bring in

visitors overnight. Each residence block had a security and a resident

warden who provided additional security to the residences. The residences

were built with self-catering units since the University no longer provided

meals to students in residences.

(vi) Beda Residence

The Committee was informed that the Beda Residence was one of the oldest

residences at the University having been built in 1934. The Committee

interacted with some students at the residence and they indicated that they

were happy with the condition of the residence. The residence was fitted

with self-catering kitchen bays at each floor and students were encouraged

to keep the residence clean. Students were prohibited to cook in their rooms.



(vii) Staff Centre

The Committee was informed that the staff centre was the central building

at the University and it was mainly used for hosting visitors, institutional

functions and also used as the Vice-Chancellor’s dining hall. The University

indicated that it experienced two weeks of intense student protests in 2017

and students vandalised and burnt the centre. The student protested for

various demands which included: delays in the payment of NSFAS

allowances; intermittent Wi-Fi connection, lack of water and other matters.

The students also burnt another building which stored surveillance

equipment. The University had submitted a claim of R5 million to the

insurance to reconstruct the building.


The SRC indicated that it had 25 members of which 10 were based at the

Alice Campus, 10 in East London and 5 (five) were institutional SRC

members. The term of the SRC began on 01 May 2017 and would end on 30

April 2018.

With regard to the 2018 registration, the SRC commended the efforts by

management in managing the registration process smoothly. Registration at

the University started on the 15 January 2018 and was still in progress. The

SRC was happy that all students were allowed to register without having to

pay the minimum initial payment and walk-ins were accepted. As at

24 January 2018, the SRC indicated that were 5 111 students registered at

the University, and students with historic debt were allowed to register and

signed the acknowledgment of debt form.

In relation to student accommodation, the SRC was concerned that the

University did not own any student residences in East London and some of

the residences were not meeting the norms and standards for student

housing as set by the Department. Moreover, the service rendered to

students living in East London student residences was inadequate. The SRC

indicated that the University had insufficient accommodation for the

number of students registered at the Alice Campus. This resulted in student

seeking alternative accommodation in the surrounding areas. The SRC was

hoping that the completion of the new student residences would alleviate the

challenge. Squatting was a serious concern at the Alice Campus owing to

the shortage of student accommodation.



The SRC listed the following challenges of students at the University:

delays by NSFAS in paying student debts and allowances due to them;

burning of buildings during a student protest; late allocation of refund due to

students; reduction of water supply in Alice; inadequate security; inadequate

financial resources at the University and inadequate infrastructure.

3.3.3. Labour Unions

3.3.3.1 National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU)

NTEU indicated that it was officially launched on 1 September 2017 at the

University and it had a diverse membership which included a sizeable pool

of academics. The union had good relations with the SRC and the other

union of institution (NEHAWU).

The union indicated that it fully supported the implementation of fee-free

higher education for poor students. However, the lack of clarity at national

level on how free education would be funded was a concern for the union.

The union indicated that it raised concerns with the management about

students with historic debt who were also coming from family households

with a family income that was less than R350 000 per annum. The union

appreciated the sensible manner in which management and the SRC

managed the registration process for 2018. However, student

accommodation remained a serious concern at the University. The union

also encouraged management to allow walk-ins.

In relation to the state of the University, the union acknowledged that the

challenges at the University outweighed its successes. There was a lack of

urgency from management in addressing the challenges of the University.

The University had an unprofessional organizational culture whereby

workers came late to work with no accountability. The union also noted the

limited government funding and absence of third stream income continued

to disadvantage the University.

According to the union, the successes of the University included: recently

built collaborative library; new institutional leadership; improved graduate

output; iconic liberation credentials and the recently built student village;

new water reservoir. The challenges include: limited funding; no third



stream income; ageing infrastructure; inadequate campus security;

leadership and governance weaknesses; lack of consequence management;

weak legal affairs; general lack of urgency and perceived lack of discipline.

The union proposed that: government should assist in funding insourcing;

biased funding model favouring historically disadvantaged institutions must

be pursued; the Portfolio Committee should consider pursuing enacting a

financial management legislation for universities; campus security should be

improved; land donation for the East London Campus should be pursued by

government to build a new student village for the University and there

should be a balanced treatment of unions since there was no majority union

at the University.


(NEHAWU)

The presentation by NEHAWU focused mainly on the challenges faced by

the workers at the University. With regard to the relations with

management, the union indicated that its relationship with management was

complementary and confrontational. The union was represented in

institutional decision-making structures such as council, senate and

institutional forum (IF). The union was able to hold the university

management accountable and responsible for its decision and actions. It also

advocated for the promotion of culture of consultation and accountability on

issues that affect the University and workers.

According to the union, the challenges faced by the University included:

poor teaching and learning as well as research infrastructure facilities; lack

of will to investigate allegations of corruption and fraud within the

institution; lack of will to hold accountable all staff members; moratorium

on appointment of foreign nationals; prolonged bargaining meetings; lack of

accommodation for staff; absence of social facilities to support social life of

staff and absence of medical facilities.

In relation to the conditions of service, the union was concerned about the

lack of competitive salaries, which were not in line with the rest of other

universities. This affected staff morale as employees felt less rewarded for

their efforts. The bargaining processes at the University always delayed due



to lack of capacity by management to manage the process. The performance

management system of the University was poorly managed and

implemented.

The union was concerned that the University implemented the cost to

company salary package system which was not a favourable option among

the employees as compared to basic salary plus benefits. The medical aid

options at the University were limited to two options, namely Bonitas and

Discovery Health. This limited the rights of employees to choose a medical

aid of their choice. The pension fund options at the University were limited

and did not make a separation between young academic employees who had

life ahead of them and old employees looking forward to retirement.

The union recommended that: government should assist with resources for

redress and capacitation; the relook at the policy and systems for funding

higher education, especially for former historically disadvantaged

institutions (HDIs) and the Department should approve some of the

scientific programmes/courses that would assist and attract more revenue

and student base for the University.

3.3.4. Management

Prof S Buhlungu expressed his gratitude to the Portfolio Committee for

visiting the University. He indicated that the University was in a much

better position as compared to the last time it met with the Portfolio

Committee due to the hard work and dedication that had been ongoing. In

relation to the presentation, the VC said that management had prepared the

presentation based on the Portfolio Committee’s correspondence.

In relation to student statistics, the VC indicated that the University had an

actual headcount enrolment of 15 442 students based on the July 2017

statistics with African students being an overwhelming majority at

96 percent. The majority of the student population was undergraduate

students at 11 721, followed by Masters students at 1 567. The University

had 789 PhD students, of which 425 were international students. The VC

was concerned that the number of South African students and female

students in the PhD programmes was low. In terms of gender distribution,

female students made up 55 percent of the total enrolments while male were

44 percent. The University’s overall success rate for 2016 was 83 percent.



In relation to the 2018 registration, the VC said that the University received

42 000 applications for 2 444 available spaces for the first time entering

students. Registration at the University began on 15 January 2018 and was

progressing smoothly. In response to the Minister’s statement on free higher

education, the University had waived the upfront registration fee for all first

year students as they came from Quintiles 1 – 3 schools.

With regard to student accommodation, the VC emphasised the fact the

University was situated in a rural area with limited off-campus or alternative

accommodation. 56 percent of students at Alice Campus lived in student

residence and 49 percent at the East London Campus. The University

experienced a serious challenge of students squatting at residences due to

the limited alternative accommodation option in Alice. The University did

not own any of its residences in East London and this was costly.

The VC acknowledged that the safety and security of students was a major

concern at both the Alice and East London Campuses. In 2017, the

University had three (3) violence related deaths. The University did not

have adequate on-campus facilities and activities. As a result, students

sought entertainment in town, and this came at risk.

The VC gave a glimpse of the successes of the University which included:

construction of a R8 million bulk water reservoir; R7 million campus

fencing project in Alice; joint Research Chair with Stellenbosch University

in meat science; the establishment of a Health Sciences Faculty; 104 PhD

graduates in 2017; increased research output; mobile laboratories for

mathematics and science support to schools; memorandum of understanding

(MoU) with Nelson Mandela Institute, Walter Sisulu University and

Raymond Mhlaba Municipality.

The VC also listed challenges of the University which included: weak

management structures; history of underfunding; poor maintenance of

infrastructure; old habits and outdated policies; 90 percent of

undergraduates are on financial aid; turning East London into a proper

campus; large numbers of under-prepared students; risk of academic

breeding; confronting problem of publication in predatory journals;

ungovernability; poor vetting of employees; high vacancy rate and

difficulties in attracting and retaining academic staff; high student to

lecturer ration; irregular contracts and inadequate residence spaces.



3.4. Buffalo City TVET College

3.4.1. Site visits

(i) Belgravia House Student Residence

The Committee was informed that the Belgravia House was a female

student residence which accommodated 300 students. The Committee was

taken to the residence’s rooms, kitchen and ablution facilities. The

Committee was informed that the residence met the DHET’s minimum

norms and standards for student housing. However, the Committee was

shocked by the unhygienic condition of the kitchen where students prepared

their meals. The kitchen’s stoves were dirty including its surroundings. The

Committee was concerned that the kitchen was not meeting the minimum

health standards. The Committee learnt that the majority of rooms had not

yet been allocated to students since registration was still in progress. The

residence required major refurbishments, however, the college did not have

funding for infrastructure refurbishments.

(ii) Gloucester House Student Residence

The Committee was informed that the Gloucester House was a male

residence which was 70 years in existence. The Committee observed that

the state of the residence was not good for living and learning. The

Committee was taken to the residence’ kitchen, and it was shocked to

observe that the plugs were broken and the kitchen was very small. The

Committee was also concerned about the health and safety of students at

this residence given the slow pace of maintenance or repair work on broken

electricity connections. The college indicated that it had attempted to raise

funding for maintenance of the residence without success. Furthermore,

legislation did not allow colleges to establish foundations similar to what

universities have.

The Committee learnt with shock to discover that one of the college’s

student residence (Mc Jannet) adjacent Gloucester House had to be shut

down due to the poor state of the building. A health and safety audit was

done on the building and college needed R40 million to refurbish it.




The SRC began the presentation by expressing its gratitude to the Portfolio

Committee for visiting the college. In relation to academics, the SRC was

concerned that the programme offering in TVET colleges was not aligned to

the national skills demand. The SRC proposed for the establishment of

systems for Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) to be aligned to the

National Qualifications Framework (NQF). They advocated for the

crediting of subjects like Maths, English and Life Orientation for students

who enroll for the NC(V) programmes with grade 11 and 12 qualifications

because the NC(V) levels are equivalent of the schooling system grades.

The SRC also proposed the phasing out of some business studies

programmes which are not responding to the country’s skills needs and the

repositioning of the entire TVET sector to deliver a curriculum that is

responsive to the country’s needs.

In relation to infrastructure, the SRC indicated that the college lacked a

number of strategic facilities such as: additional classrooms; resource

centres; workshops and residences. The SRC proposed that the first trench

of the R50 billion from the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) be

allocated for infrastructure development in the TVET sector as

recommended by the Heher Commission.

With regard to financial aid, the SRC welcomed the pronouncement of fee-

free higher education by the President since more students in the TVET

sector will qualify for financial assistance. However, the SRC was

concerned about the lack of support from Treasury on the implementation of

free education. The SRC was also concerned that the Minister of Higher

Education and Training did not invite the South African Further Education

and Training Students Association (SAFETSA) at the meeting with other

student bodies on 26 January 2018. They felt the Minister was deliberately

undermining the sector and they said they would respond to that.

In relation to governance, the SRC was concerned with inadequate financial

support from the college for its activities. The SRC had submitted a

programme of action with a budget estimate amounting to R1.3 million to

enhance the academic environment of the college. However, management

did not accept the request. They expressed a concern about the lack of

provision of SRC budget in the Continuing Education and Training Act.



3.4.3. Labour Unions

3.4.3.1 South African Democratic Teacher Union (SADTU)

The union began the presentation by thanking the Portfolio Committee for

visiting the college and also allowing the unions to participate in its

meeting. The union indicated that the workers of the college had serious

challenges which remained unresolved and were negatively impacting on

the teaching and learning. The union was hopeful that the oversight visit of

the Portfolio Committee to the college would help to resolve some of the

issues that remained unresolved and bolster the culture of teaching and

learning.

The union expressed a concern about the widening salary gap in the

education sector. In support of this statement, the union indicated that the

salary structure of TVET colleges consisted of a single salary scale with 221

notches and an additional 1 percent annual pay progress based on

performance assessment. Furthermore, the salaries of TVET lecturers in

comparison with that of Agricultural and Nursing college lecturers had

shown unconditional wage gaps that were substantially larger, and the pay

progression of 1 percent awarded to college lecturers was below by

0.5 percent when compared with other public servant’s pay progression.

In relation to the challenges affecting workers at the college, the union

indicated that: the accuracy of the income differential analysis and audit

results (IDAAR) was concerning since it contained incorrect staff notches

and other discrepancies; the leakage of the IDAAR and other five

documents in May 2016 through email violated the employees’

confidentiality rights as their salaries were made public. The union also

expressed concerns about the merging of the human resource development,

wellness and labour relations under one manager.


(NEHAWU) and Public Service Association (PSA)

The unions presented a consolidated presentation that highlighted mainly the

challenges of workers at the college. The unions raised concerns with regard

to: incorrect salary scales of workers; salary top-ups that were not corrected



which also impacted on workers benefits; delays in the filling of vacant and

critical posts when an employee retires or resigns; HR delaying the

appointment processes; shortage of staff; vacant posts that were being filled

by external people; lack of support from the labour relations department

which mainly favoured management over employees; inconsistent

disciplinary measures and inadequate bursary allocation to employees.

The unions recommended that: general workers salary scales be rectified

and made consistent across the board; the college should advertise and fill

vacancies internally and place external adverts when a suitable candidate is

not available; employees should receive more support from the labour

relations department; the rotation policy should be drafted and approved and

employees who leaked confidential information be disciplined.

3.5. Management

The presentation was made by the Principal, Mr D Singh. The Principal

indicated that the BCC TVET college was established in 2002 as a result of

a merger between three colleges situated in the Greater East London area,

namely: East London College; border Technical College and John Knox

Bokwe Career College. The college had three campuses and one skills

centre which provides vocational and occupational training.

In providing an update on the 2018 registration, the Principal said that the

registration process commenced on 09-10 January 2018 for returning

students whilst the new students started to register on 11-12 January 2018.

The mop-up registration which accommodated learners on the waiting list

closed on 26 January 2018. In terms of enrolment numbers, the college had

2 232 students in the NC(V) programmes; 505 in Report 191 Business

Studies N4 - N6; 440 in Report 191 Engineering Studies N1 – N3; 1 320 in

Report 191 Business Studies (Part-Time) N4 - N6; and 325 in Skills and

Occupational programmes.

With regard to student success and certification rates, the Principal indicated

that the average certification rate for the NC(V) Level 2 - 4 was 36 percent

in 2017, which was lower than the national norm. The average Report 191

Business Studies certification rate was 71 percent, whilst the average

certification rate for Report 191 Engineering Studies was 43 percent. The

Principal reported about the outstanding certificates as follows: NCV L2 –

4: 415, N4 – N6 915, Diplomas: 173 and National Senior Certificate: 04.



In relation to student housing, the Principal indicated that the college had a

total of 347 beds. The MC Jannet residence which had a total of 30 beds

was closed due to the poor state of the building. The Principal said that the

college did not have money to refurbish the residence.

The challenges of the college include: low certification rates; lack of

permanent CFO; lack of capacity in areas such as information technology,

procurement, legal and infrastructure; administration of NSFAS bursaries

and delays in the payment of allowances; lost teaching and learning time;

inadequate funding from the DHET; limited decision making authority/

autonomy; difficulties in forming partnerships with public and private

institutions and curriculum not aligned to industry needs.

4. Observations

The Committee conducted an oversight visit to assess the following:

• implementation of the fee-free higher education policy by

universities and TVET Colleges;

• the 2018 academic year admissions and registration processes;

• the administration of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme;

• student performance in the 2017 academic year; and

• capacity of the institutions in terms of infrastructure, in particular,

student accommodation and teaching and learning facilities.

The following formed part of the Committee’s key findings:

4.1. General findings:

4.1.1. Implementation of fee-free higher education policy

• The University stakeholders welcomed the announcement of the new

policy on fee-free education for the poor and working class.

However, the SRCs expressed concerns at the lack of clarity on how

the policy is to be implemented by government.

• Students also expressed a concern about the confusion around the

historic debt of NSFAS beneficiaries because government has not

provided clarity on when funding will be made available to cater for

the debt from 2016. At Walter Sisulu University, the Committee was



informed that students were required to pay 25 percent of their total

debt before they could register, which contradicted a resolution

taken by the Department and university Registrars to allow students

to sign a debt acknowledgement form and be registered. At Buffalo

City TVET College, students were concerned that the pronounce-

ment of the policy on fee-free higher education was not enjoying any

financial endorsement by the National Treasury. They also noted

that a circular from the Department of Higher Education and

Training, dated 16 January 2018 urging the Colleges to consider

resource constraints in their enrolment process.

• The Committee noted a concern raised by students at all the

institutions that though government has pronounced on fee-free

higher education, institutions were stuck on the enrolment plans,

which did not provide a room to increase enrolment numbers, given

that the majority of students from the poor and working class

households now qualify to study. Students recommended a review of

the enrolment plans of the institutions.

4.1.2. Admissions and registration processes

• The Committee noted that systems were put in place to strengthen

the admission and registration processes so as to cater for the walk-

ins and students who did not apply for NSFAS funding in 2017. The

institutions used the halls to accommodate all the services required

by students during the registration process so as to ensure that the

process was smooth.

• Walter Sisulu University reported on protest incidents that took

place at the Butterworth and East London campuses, but

management was able to resolve the issues with SRCs of the

respective campuses.

• The Committee was concerned that the University of Fort Hare did

not meet its target in the admission of first-time entering students

despite the increased number of learners who passed Matric in the

Eastern Cape province. The Committee noted that financial need is

no longer a barrier to accessing expensive universities owing to the

new policy on fee-free higher education. This might have

contributed to the drop in enrolments at the University of Fort Hare.



4.1.3. Administration of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme

• The Committee noted reports by universities and TVET Colleges

that NSFAS continued to be a major cause of instability at the

campuses.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the reported NSFAS

outstanding payments owed to universities and TVET Colleges for

the 2017 academic year. For the 2017 academic year, NSFAS could

not allocate R800 million out of the R2 billion allocation for TVET

college bursary funding.

• The delay in the payment of the upfront payment to institutions was

noted as a serious concern. However, NSFAS made an undertaking

to pay the upfront funding by the 26 January 2018.

• The delays by NSFAS in paying outstanding claims due to students

at Walter Sisulu University remained a serious concern. Some

students were owed outstanding claims as far back as 2016. The

Committee was extremely concerned about the blame shift between

NSFAS and the University about this matter. The problem seemed to

be the frequent change of regulations by NSFAS in the new student-

centred model. The University in its written response to the

Committee indicated that it was owed R105 million in outstanding

claims by NSFAS and could not determine the figures for 2018 since

registration was still underway.

• The University of Fort Hare in its written response to the Committee

indicated that it was owed R184 million by NSFAS in outstanding

claims for 2017 as at 6 February 2018.

• The KSD TVET college in its written response to the Committee

indicated that NSFAS paid the R6 million that was owed for 2017.

• The BC TVET college in its written response to the Committee

indicated that an amount of R1.4 million had still not been paid in

respect of 2016 and the matter had been followed up with NSFAS on

a regular basis, and all information requested by NSFAS had been

submitted. For the 2017 academic year, a claim of R1.9 million had

not been paid by NSFAS.



4.1.4. Infrastructure

• Inadequate infrastructure, in particular, teaching and learning

facilities and student accommodation was seriously concerning.

Lack of private accommodation closer to the rural institutions

exacerbated the challenge.

• The Committee was concerned about reports of the overcrowded

lecture halls at Walter Sisulu University, where some students were

forced to stand outside the halls while lectures were offered.

• Lack of maintenance of the existing infrastructure at some

institutions like Walter Sisulu University, King Sabatha Dalindyebo

and Buffalo City TVET Colleges was noted as a serious concern.

The Committee was concerned that the TVET sector did not receive

infrastructure efficiency grant to expand or maintain.

• The Committee noted a concern expressed by Walter Sisulu

University about water shortages at Butterworth Campus and Fort

Hare University Alice Campus. This has forced these institutions to

direct funding towards installing reservoirs and tanks to address the

challenge.

4.1.5. Students’ academic performance in the 2017 academic year

• One of the Committee’s objective was to assess the students’

academic performance for the 2017 academic year, the Committee

noted that graduate numbers at Walter Sisulu University increased

from 5 027 in 2016 to 5 735 in 2017. The success rate in the 2016

academic year was 80 percent. The overall success rate at the

University of Fort Hare student success rate was 83 percent in the

2016 academic year.

• For the TVET colleges: King Sabatha Dalindyebo TVET college’s

overall success rate in NC(V) programme was 76 percent and

36 percent certification. For Report 191 programmes, the overall

progression rate was 74 percent and certification was at

47 percent. Success rate at Buffalo City TVET college, the

certification rate in the NC(V) programmes was 36 percent in

2017, while the certification rate in Report 191 Business Studies

was 71 percent and 43 percent in the Engineering Studies. Of

concern to note was the lower certification rate in the NC(V)

programmes at both the colleges.



4.2. Specific findings per institution

4.2.1. Walter Sisulu University

• The University experienced a serious challenge of decaying

infrastructure, especially at the Nelson Mandela Drive Campus. The

poor maintenance of the University’s facilities compounded the

situation. The state of some of the University’s student residences

was shocking and students lived in uninhabitable conditions. The

University faced a risk of losing more buildings if management did

not develop a clear plan on how to restore its dilapidating

infrastructure. The Committee was also shocked to learn that the

infrastructure maintenance backlog of the University amounted to

R3.4 billion based on 2014 estimates.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the poor residence

management system at the University. Management did not have

proper mechanisms in place to control overcrowding and access

control to the residences. Management also seemed shocked like the

Committee about the extent of illegal activities at some of the

residences, in particular the Iphulo residence. The situation at this

residence seemed to be out of control and it was not a place to live

and learn. The University submitted a response to the Committee

after the oversight visit which indicated that the illegal occupants

had since been evicted and registered students were allocated the

rooms at this residence. The spaza shop was also closed.

• The overall poor maintenance of the University, especially the NMD

campus was shocking. Both the students and management seemed to

be complacent about the poor state of the NMD campus. It seemed

that students did not take pride in keeping their residences in good

condition.

• The Committee expressed a concern with what seemed to be a lack

of responsibility from the SRC in communicating with the student

body to prevent vandalism of the University’s infrastructure. Some

of the University’s buildings had been badly vandalised during the

student protests.



• The Committee was shocked to learn that management seemed to

accept the lawlessness at some of the University’s residences.

Management also feared to introduce effective security measures at

some residences without the buy-in of the SRC and students.

Management feared that if they were to remove the squatting

students, the students might burn the buildings. Of great concern was

the reported plan by the University to legalise squatting, which

would worsen the squalor living conditions.

• The Committee was extremely concerned about poor safety and

security at the NMD Campus as well as the seven murders of

students within the university precincts. The University indicated

that the issue of safety and security had been tabled and considered

at the last meeting of the Institutional Management Committee.

Moreover, various intervention plans and task team had been

established to address the issue and a comprehensive plan on the

intervention strategy was being finalised.

• The absence of the SRC and the unions in some of the institution’s

key decision-making structures was a concern. The structural design

of the institution seemed to be the cause of disagreement among the

University’s stakeholders. The Committee observed that there was a

competition for resources among the four campuses of the

University. This delayed the progress and growth of some of the

smaller and more viable campuses, such as the Queenstown campus

which received 125 hectares of land for expansion. However, there

were no funds available to develop the campus.

• The divisional model of management which seemed not to be

functioning properly was noted with serious concern.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the

harmonisation of conditions of service of employees in the different

campuses of the University. Since the merger of the University in

2005, employees still had their old employment benefits and this

created discontent amongst the employees. The University indicated

that a consultant was appointed to assist with this process and a new

HR Director had been employed to steer the process. Moreover, the

matter was also tabled as an item on the agenda of the Joint

Bargaining Forum.



• The Committee expressed a concern about the polarized relations

between management and the University stakeholders. The

stakeholders indicated that management was autocratic in resolving

the matters that affect workers and students.

• The University had pockets of excellence in some fields of study

such as fine arts, medicine and accounting programmes. The

University was also the third biggest employer in the Eastern Cape

with an estimated budget of R1.7 billion.

• In relation to the erroneous payment of R14 million into a student

account in June 2017, the University indicated that it received the

forensic report from Intellimali and the report said nothing. The

report could not identify the source of erroneous payment and the

DHET had conducted its own investigation that would be released in

February 2018. The implicated student failed half of her modules in

2017 and the University was not ready to institute a disciplinary

hearing against her until all due processes had been followed.

• The Committee was grateful to learn that two employees who were

involved in student accommodation irregularities had been

dismissed and the investigations into other cases were ongoing.

• The de-accreditation of the Bachelor of Social Work and Bachelor of

Law and the slow pace in developing improvement plans was

concerning as it would cause a reputation damage to the institution.

The Committee also noted the review of the engineering

programmes was to be undertaken by the Engineering Council of

South Africa (ECSA) and there were fears among students and

unions that the programmes may lose accreditation.

4.2.2. King Sabatha Dalindyebo TVET College

• The Committee commended the willingness of the College’s

stakeholders to work together and forge a better relationship.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the R8 million of NSFAS

funding that was not claimed by the college in 2017. The college

indicated that it had submitted all the required student data to



NSFAS. However, NSFAS was delaying to process the students’

claims. NSFAS indicated that some of the student data submitted by

the college was incorrect hence the payments could not be

processed. The delays in the release of students’ results by the

Department also compounded the situation.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the college’s R40 million

deficit owing to the serious underfunding from the Department. The

college was unable to repair and maintain its infrastructure due to

lack of dedicated infrastructure funding for TVET colleges. The

deficit has resulted in the capping of student enrolment.

• The Committee commended the pass rates of students, especially in

the Engineering programme. However, the throughput rate of

students was concerning.

• The college had two Chief Financial Officers (CFOs), however, it

received a qualified audit in 2017.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the delays by the

Department in issuing student’s results. The delays in the release of

outstanding results impacted adversely on the registration of

returning students as they did not know the outcomes of the

examinations, as well as on NSFAS in assessing the academic

eligibility of the students who applied for funding. The Department

reported that this was caused the non-submission of the Internal

Continuous Assessment (ICASS) marks by the Colleges, and the

batch of results was withheld by Umalusi due to exam irregularities.

• The involvement of the Departmental officials in the leakage of

examination papers was noted with serious concern.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the filling of

key vacancies by the college and the Department.

4.2.3. University of Fort Hare

• The Committee commended the progress made by the University in

addressing some of the challenges and its improved financial

position since the last engagement with the Committee in September

2016. A new management team was in place to stabilize the

institution.



• The Committee expressed a concern about the high number of the

University’s publications (25 percent) in predatory journals. The

University indicated that the pressure among the academics to

publish for promotional purposes and to get promotion as well as

incentives contributed to this problem.

• The Committee was concerned about the high vacancy rate at the

University. The University was operating without 45 percent of staff

(both academic and support).

• The high number of students of the University in residences

(56 percent) at the Alice Campus and 49 percent in East London was

commended. However, the Committee expressed a serious concern

that the University did not own any of its residences in East London.

• The Committee expressed a concern about the destruction of

property and infrastructure by students during their protests. The

Committee condemned the burning of the staff centre and other

buildings by students in 2017. The University in its written response

to the Committee indicated that the total damage to infrastructure as

a result of the protests amounted to R8.9 million.

• The good working relationship between the University management

and its stakeholders was commended.

• The Committee commended the state of cleanliness of the

University’s student residences.

• The delays by NSFAS in paying allowances due to students were

noted as a serious concern. Nevertheless, the University allowed

students to register without paying registration fees and assisted

them until NSFAS settled the outstanding claims. The challenge of

the University was that NSFAS took too long to transfer the funds

due to students and this compromised the financial operations of the

University.

• The Committee noted a concern raised by the unions on the

exclusion of the universities in the Public Finance Management Act

(Act No. 29 of 1999) and lack of consequence management when

there is mismanagement of funds.



• The low enrolment of South Africans and female students in the

PhD programmes was noted with serious concern.

• The Committee noted a concern raised by unions of student suicide,

which is becoming common in institutions of higher learning.

• Corruption by staff members at the University was noted with

concern.

4.2.4. Buffalo City TVET college

• The Committee commended the college for its good academic

performance given its limited infrastructure and resources.

• The challenge of the late payment of NSFAS allowances affected

students at the college since they came from poor family households.

• The state of the residences visited by the Committee was

concerning. The college indicated that it did not have funds for

infrastructure maintenance.

• The College expressed a concern about lack of autonomy to

establish foundations to raise funds which could be utilised for

infrastructure development.

• The inadequate partnership between the college and nearby

universities for articulation and other areas of common interest was

concerning.

• The Committee was concerned about the low staff morale owing to

disparities in salary scales of lecturers and this affected quality

teaching and learning. It was reported that lecturers with same

qualifications were paid different notches. The College reported that

the lecturers affected were those on the Department’s persal system.

• The College expressed a concern about not having a permanent CFO

and lack of capacity in areas such as IT, procurement, legal and

infrastructure and the fact these posts are not provided for on the

persal system of the college. They noted that these posts could only

be created by the Minister.



5. Summary

The oversight visit of the Committee focused mainly on assessing the 2018

registration process at universities and TVET colleges in the Eastern Cape

as well as to check the state of readiness of the institutions for the 2018

academic year. The Committee was pleased with the smooth registration

process at all the institutions it visited as well the institutions’ commitment

to open more opportunities for students who were coming from poor family

households and the walk-ins.

In relation to student funding, the overwhelming majority of students who

enrolled at the institutions that were visited by the Committee came from

poor family households. The Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher

education meant that more students from poor and working class family

households would qualify for financial assistance. The general observation

by the Committee was that the institutions responded positively to the

Presidential pronouncement and students with historic debts were allowed

to register on the basis that they sign an acknowledgement of debt form.

The Committee was concerned about complaints related to the roll-out of

NSFAS new student centred model. The situation was even more

challenging in the TVET sector since NSFAS could not allocate R800

million out of the R2 billion allocation for TVET college bursary funding in

2017. All the institutions visited complained about the delays by NSFAS in

the payment of allowances due to students owing to the frequent changes in

the rules/guidelines for administering the new student-centred model. In

response, NSFAS accused the institutions of submitting incorrect student

registration data and the non-signing of loan agreement forms. The

Committee was concerned by what it seemed to be a lack of clear guidelines

by NSFAS on the roll-out of the new student-centred model. The eligible

NSFAS beneficiaries were the most disadvantaged by this misunderstanding

and this contributed to the high drop-out rate.

Student housing was a serious challenge in the entire post-school education

and training sector. However, the situation was even worse in the TVET

sector since these institutions did not have a dedicated infrastructure

efficiency grant similar to universities. The Committee was concerned that



the colleges did not have funds to maintain and develop new infrastructure.

The Committee was also seriously concerned about the inadequate

maintenance plan by the institutions which contributed to the speedy

deterioration of existing infrastructure. The shortage of student housing was

raised by all the SRCs that met with the Committee.

The Committee was also pleased with the determination and commitment of

the institutions in responding to some of the government’s key policy

objectives. There were several pockets of excellence that were observed by

the Committee during the oversight visit. The core business of the post-

school education and training institutions to create better opportunities for

students to access the economy seemed to be in place.

6. Recommendations


conducted an oversight visit to post-school education and training

institutions in the Eastern Cape, recommends that the Minister of Higher

Education and Training consider the following:

6.1 Walters Sisulu University

• The University had not been able to harmonise employees’

conditions of service since its merger in 2005. The process had been

delayed too long and it contributed to the high attrition of skilled

personnel. The harmonisation of employees’ conditions of service

should be fast tracked and the Department should assist with the

necessary support needed by the University to finalise this process.

• The student residences at the Nelson Mandela Drive Campus were in

a shocking state and not conducive for living and learning. The

University was short of recreational facilities and its buildings

needed major refurbishments. The Department should assist the

University with the necessary support it needs to repair and maintain

its infrastructure.



• The delays in the payment of allowances due to students by NSFAS

remained a serious concern at the University. The Department

should ensure that NSFAS resolves all the payment of outstanding

claims for students and put mechanisms in place to ensure that the

problem does not recur in the 2018 academic year.

• The student deaths and violence at the University’s residences was

concerning. The University should prioritise the safety and security

of students and install access control systems to prevent outsiders

from invading the University’s premises.

• The relationship between the University’s stakeholders and

management was characterised by mistrust. The University should

explore the possibility of creating a multi-stakeholders forum to deal

with internal disputes effectively.

• The overall maintenance and cleanliness of the University was

concerning. The University should develop an effective maintenance

plan to keep the University in a good state.

• The University should report to the Committee on progress made in

the implementation of the oversight visit recommendations, and the

oversight visit of the Committee over the University is ongoing.

6.2 King Sabatha Dalindyebo and Buffalo City TVET colleges

• TVET colleges did not have a dedicated infrastructure grant for the

maintenance and development of infrastructure. The Department

should fast track the process of having infrastructure grants for the

TVET sector.

• The recurring delays in the release of student’s results had a negative

impact on student progression including the payment of NSFAS

allowances due to students. The Department should strengthen its

internal control systems to prevent the leakage of examination

papers.

• The inadequate roll-out of the new student-centred model in the

TVET sector was concerning. The Department should ensure that

NSFAS clarifies its guidelines on the roll-out of the new student-

centred model in TVET colleges.



• The Committee observed that there were inadequate partnerships

between colleges and universities. The Department should assist

TVET colleges in establishing more partnerships and memorandum

of understanding (MoUs) with universities.

• TVET college’s employees were concerned about human resource

challenges as a result of the function shift. The Department should

assist colleges in correcting the human resource (HR) deficiencies as

a result of the function shift.

6.3 University of Fort Hare

• The University did not own any of its residences in East London and

this was very costly for the University. The Department should assist

the University in getting land to expand its infrastructure in East

London.

• NSFAS should fast track the payment of outstanding claims of due

to students from 2017.

• The safety and security of students especially those that reside in

residences should be prioritised. The University should consider the

possibility of exploring partnerships with the local Community

Policing Forum (CPF) in a bid to improve the safety of students

nearby the University premises.

• The students at the Alice Campus complained about the lack of

social activities within the campus. As a result, they went to town to

socialize and their safety outside the campus was at risk. The

University should consider having more social spaces or events

within its campus so that students can socialize within its premises.

Report to be considered.

Date post:	28-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vuongnguyet
View:	237 times
Download:	2 times

OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA - parliament.gov.za · Establishment of Joint Rules Subcommittee...

Documents