Parliament, Wednesday, 18 March 2026 – The Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration today welcomed efforts underway at the Public Service Commission (PSC) to address political interference in public service appointment processes.
The committee received briefings from PSC, the Department of Public Service and Administration and the Centre for Public Service Innovation on their performance for quarters one to three of the 2025/2026 financial year.
In its engagement with the PSC, the committee welcomed the public service watchdog’s efforts to develop a good practice guide for the recruitment of senior executives and to propose a panel of experts to participate in senior appointment interviews. This is aimed at curbing political interference in appointment processes and strengthening professionalism in the public service. The proposed expert panel is intended to bring greater objectivity and credibility to the appointment of senior officials.
Members noted that the issue of merit-based recruitment remains central to building a capable, ethical and developmental state. The committee heard that the guide is expected by the end of this financial year.
The committee was also informed that the PSC is assessing departmental readiness to implement the professionalising of the public service and that a formal oversight report will be made available. Members emphasised that good policies and frameworks must be matched by credible implementation plans, measurable targets and stronger accountability.
Members welcomed the role of the National Anti-Corruption Hotline operated by the PSC, but raised concern that it is not yet a 24-hour service. Members requested more information on cases referred through the hotline that resulted in disciplinary action, dismissals or criminal referrals. The committee was encouraged by the indication that consequence management has followed in a number of cases.
Another concern raised involved the weak implementation of recommendations issued by Chapter 9 institutions. Members heard that the Public Service Commission has increasingly moved beyond written correspondence and is now engaging the ministers, premiers and heads of department directly to improve compliance. The committee welcomed this proactive approach but emphasised that departments cannot continue to treat constitutional recommendations as optional.
Members also questioned whether the Public Service Commission has adequate financial and human resource capacity to fulfil its oversight, investigative and monitoring mandate, particularly in provincial offices. The committee heard that capacity constraints remain significant and that provincial offices continue to carry large workloads with limited personnel.
Members also asked about the Rapid Response Unit, which the Public Service Commission described as an evolving mechanism for resolving urgent public complaints more quickly. The committee said such interventions could make a meaningful difference in cases where citizens experience delayed salaries, unresolved service delivery failures or administrative injustice.
Issues of professionalisation, accountability and consequence management were reinforced in the committee’s engagement with the Department of Public Service and Administration. Members reiterated concerns from last year that, although policies and frameworks are in place to build a capable, ethical, and professional public service, translating these into consistent, measurable improvements remains uneven.
The committee noted the department’s explanation that its role is to develop policy, norms and standards for the public service, but stressed that stronger accountability mechanisms are required to ensure that policy interventions are effectively implemented across departments. Members were particularly concerned about non-compliance with the National Framework for the Professionalisation of the Public Sector, which aims to build a capable and developmental state, and about the lack of consequence management.
Members noted the implications of decentralised accountability, evident in disciplinary and consequence management. While the department provides guidelines and monitoring frameworks, responsibility for implementation rests with individual departments. This results in inconsistent application, prolonged disciplinary cases and limited enforcement of timelines such as the 90-day timeframe for finalising disciplinary cases. The committee noted that this has serious implications for the integrity of the public service.
Concerns were also expressed about delays in filling vacancies, particularly in senior management posts and recruiting youth to the public service. Members urged the department to improve its skills development and workplace planning.
The Chairperson of the committee, Mr Jan de Villiers, welcomed the presentations and reiterated that monitoring the implementation of the professionalisation framework remains a priority for the committee. “Professionalising the public service must begin with credible appointments, ethical leadership and real accountability. We welcome the PSC’s work in this regard. Across the sector, however, implementation must now follow with urgency,” he said.
ISSUED BY THE PARLIAMENTARY COMMUNICATION SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION, MR JAN DE VILLIERS.
For media enquiries or interviews with the Chairperson, please contact the committee’s media officer:
Name: Alicestine October (Ms)
Cell: 083 665 4345
E-mail: aoctober@parliament.gov.za
Arrange a tour