Q&A’s, 2007

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
Question for Written Reply
IQP: 34-2007

Question 1518

Dr S M van Dyk (DA) to ask the Minister for Public Enterprises:

a) Why did the performance bonuses paid to staff in his department increase by 99% from the 2005-06 to the 2006-07 financial year,

b) how is this increase justified against the performance of the state-owned enterprises in respect of which his department manages the Government shareholdings and;

c) regarding each person who was awarded a performance bonus in the (i) 2005-06 and (ii) 2006-07 financial years, what (aa) was his or her annual salary, (bb) was the amount of the performance bonus awarded, (cc) was the reason for the awarding of a performance bonus and (dd) is the explanation for any notable difference in the performance bonus awarded in the two financial years? NW2288E

Reply

a) The increase in the amount paid was due to:

• An increase in the number of staff from 123 to 140
• Annual cost of living adjustment of 5.3%
• An increase in the basic percentages for performance related awards as prescribed by Public Service and Administration.
  i. Levels 11 – 12 increased to 14% on package
  ii. SMS increased to 14%
  iii. SMS employees qualified for awards due to the decrease in performance cycle from 24 months to 12 months
• The introduction of all inclusive packages for middle management (levels 11 and 12).

b) The mission of the department is to provide clear mandates, effective performance management and simple, implementable governance systems to the SOE. It is by these areas of performance that the department’s performance is measured.

i. Clear mandates – All SOE reporting to the Department have had their mandates reviewed, and each of the SOE are in the process of implementing either aggressive infrastructure investment programmes or are well advanced in the implementation of their turn around strategies.

ii. Effective Performance Management – All SOE reporting to the department submit quarterly reports and in certain instances monthly reports. All these reports are assessed for compliance to the Corporate Plan and for progress against the Shareholder Compact. All legislated deadlines are complied with across the board, as is evidenced by the timeous lodging of all Annual Reports. It is only in exceptional circumstances that deadlines are not achieved, but this is always with the full concurrence of the Shareholder representative.

iii. Simple governance system – In the 2006/07 financial year, Denel; Eskom; Safcol and Transnet signed Shareholder Compacts. Alexkor did not sign a Compact due to the land claims process. SAA was not within the DPE portfolio, hence no Compact was signed.

Furthermore, as evidenced by the recently lodged Annual reports, most of the SOE under the department’s oversight have shown excellent progress with respect to their overall performance and when measured against their Shareholder Compacts.

c) The department cannot divulge personal information of employees. However, the performance awards are subject to the regular statutory audit by the Auditor General.