Share

Special deal for Parliament’s ‘bouncers’

accreditation
Fracas in the National Assembly. Picture: Lerato Maduna
Fracas in the National Assembly. Picture: Lerato Maduna

Introduction of the title of chamber support officer has in effect split the parliamentary protection service

Parliament’s so-called bouncers are back in the spotlight after removing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) MPs from Parliament before President Jacob Zuma’s question time this week, raising questions over their lack of ­identifiable uniform and name badges, and queries about their remuneration.

DA chief whip John Steenhuisen, in the aftermath of the EFF eviction, asked National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete why the personnel who removed the Red Berets could not be identified as such. He said he had raised the matter of the uniform and name tags four months ago.

Mbete promised to look into the issue.

Further issues over the bouncers emerged this week as ­documents seen by City Press showed that they had been hired as “chamber support officers” – a new job title separating them from the existing parliamentary protection services.

Parliament reshuffled its staffing structure to create the new position so that it could accommodate these former police officers – called in to evict MPs – at a better annual pay of up to R150 000 more than the existing team of parliamentary protection service officials.

This new job title raises serious questions because, ­traditionally, those working in the chamber – such as the ­assistants, who provide water to MPs and carry notes to them – report to the sergeant at arms and are understood to fall under the support services division.

The introduction of the title of chamber support officer has in effect split the parliamentary protection service. Now there are the existing protection officers who, together with members of the SA Police Service, continue to man access points, and the chamber support officers, who spring into ­action to remove disruptive MPs.

The bouncers are linked to the power politics that has ­become endemic to the House. Opposition parties objected to the use of police in the chamber, as happened in November 2014, and again during the 2015 state of the nation address. But the ANC was determined to strengthen Parliament’s ­protection services.

Parliament’s plan to second police officials was thwarted when Rule 53, adopted at the end of July 2015, made it clear that only parliamentary protection officers would be allowed into the chamber to escort out unruly MPs.

City Press has seen the changes to Parliament’s organogram, specifically with regard to the protection services. The chamber support officers report to a different line manager from the protection officers.

And in additional correspondence seen by City Press, the protection officers’ manager raised concern over the lack of consultations on this matter in March this year.

Three sources have told City Press that the new organogram was distributed to protection services staff in January, but it is unclear when the changes were made. The organogram also reveals that Parliament plans to hire 38 more bouncers.

However, Parliament spokesperson Luzuko Jacobs said that the chamber support officers were part of the protection services and that changes to the organogram were agreed to ­between the secretary to Parliament and presiding officers.

Documents seen by City Press reveal that protection service officers earn between R263 824 and R315 908 per year, while bouncers earn between R416 091 and R509 989.

“The development and evaluation of the job descriptions, as well as the determination of salaries for the positions, followed all formal institutional human resources policies and procedures, hence their levels and salaries,” said Jacobs.

He did not explain why the bouncers had a different job title to protection service officers, but maintained that they were part of that unit.

Mbete confirmed a City Press report in August that active police officers were recruited to strengthen the capacity of the parliamentary protection service.

She said that this was as a result of the National Assembly approving new rules for dealing with disruptions during its proceedings.

“The rules create a role for the parliamentary protection service in the removal of a member [of Parliament]. This ­requirement has necessitated that the capacity of that department be strengthened,” she wrote in a letter to political party leaders at the time.

Mbete said that candidates who met the requirements were offered employment and that those who accepted the posts had since resigned from the police service.

“The process included interviews and screening of the ­relevant personnel,” she said.

But parliamentary sources, including those in the protection service, denied her claims, saying that the positions had never been advertised.

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
Who we choose to trust can have a profound impact on our lives. Join thousands of devoted South Africans who look to News24 to bring them news they can trust every day. As we celebrate 25 years, become a News24 subscriber as we strive to keep you informed, inspired and empowered.
Join News24 today
heading
description
username
Show Comments ()
Voting Booth
Do you believe that the various planned marches against load shedding will prompt government to bring solutions and resolve the power crisis?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
Yes
21% - 103 votes
No
79% - 397 votes
Vote