Department of Environmental Affairs & SANBI on their 2014/15 Annual Reports; Fourth Term Programme, 2015

Meeting report

Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) on 2014/15 audit outcomes of the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and its entities

Mr Samed Omar, Senior Manager: AGSA said the purpose of the presentation was for the AGSA to provide an overview of the audit outcomes and other findings in respect of the Environmental Affairs portfolio for the 2014/15 financial year. The DEA had the responsibility of ensuring the protection of the environment and the conservation of the natural resources. It had oversight of four entities --  South African National Parks (SANParks), South African Weather Service (SAWS), South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) and Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority. 

The lack of improvement in the overall audit outcome had been caused by SANParks not preventing material findings on their annual performance report and compliance with legislation. However, leadership had been stabilised at SANParks after the appointments of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO).

The regression in the audit outcome of SANBI was due to the Institute receiving material findings on compliance with legislation.

The SAWS had received a clean audit opinion by addressing past material findings on compliance with legislation.

The DEA and Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority had maintained their clean audit opinions.

The unchanged audit outcome of the SANParks had been due to a lack of skills relating to performance information, which had led to the non-compliance and material findings on predetermined objectives in the audit report. 

The quality of financial statements submitted for audit had regressed at SANBI, causing a finding of non–compliance, whilst the quality of financial statements at SANParks had improved from the previous year.

The quality of annual performance reports at SANParks had remained unchanged due to management not receiving regular training to adequately review the annual performance reports for accuracy, validity and completeness. However, findings had been noted at the DEA, SAWS and SANBI which had not affected the audit report.

Leadership had been ineffective in improving the information technology (IT) control environment at the DEA, Isimangaliso, SANBI, SANParks and SAWS.

Auditor- General’s six key focus areas

Mr Ritesh Ramnanthan, Manager: AGSA continued with the above point. AGSA’s six key focus areas were the quality of submitted financial statements and performance reports, compliance with legislation, financial health, human resource management and information technology. Unauthorised expenditure meant expenditure not in accordance with the budget vote, or overspending of the budget. In this regard, nothing had been discovered amongst the entities. Irregular expenditure meant expenditure incurred in contravention of key legislation, and prescribed processes not being followed. On this matter, SANParks had made an irregular payment of R126 000. The root cause had been the lack of a supplier database to identify and remove prohibited suppliers. AGSA had recommended that SANParks’s management should ensure their database was adequately and regularly updated to ensure no payments were made to prohibited suppliers. Fruitless and wasteful expenditure meant expenditure incurred in vain which could have been avoided if reasonable steps had been taken. Here, SANParks had spent R 295 100. The root cause had been failure on the part of management to put in place adequate processes to avoid stock losses, cash embezzlement and penalties.

The drivers of key controls for the portfolio were leadership, financial & performance management and governance. On this matter, SANParks had been found wanting with its reporting.The key root cause had been a lack of appropriate competencies on the part of the officials. Management of SANParks and SANBI had been urged to attend training regularly to review the annual performance report adequately for accuracy, validity and completeness. Management should also ensure thorough review processes of financial statements were in place prior to submission on 31 May. A commitment had been made by the Minister to have the vacant positions at SANParks filled, and that had been implemented.

Discussion

The Chairperson asked AGSA to provide in layman’s terminology the findings on Information Technology.

Mr Ramnanthan said IT involved:

• Security management in the form of firewalls. Entities had firewalls but they were not adequate enough.
• User access management – passwords and administrative servers.
• IT service continuity – a back-up plan and a business continuity plan.
• IT governance – management of IT frameworks.

Mr M Shelembe (NFP) asked what the AGSA meant by lack of competency on the part of the officials. Did it mean a lack of qualification or a lack of experience for the job?

The Chairperson said that all the entities had received unqualified reports. He asked how the DEA was doing and whether value for money was seen in provinces.

Mr S Mabilo (ANC) asked the meaning of “prohibited service provider.”

Mr Z Makhubele (ANC) asked if AGSA had engaged with other audit committees in the entities.

The Chairperson asked why entities continued to have misstatements. Had the Portfolio Committee improved at the provincial and national level?

Mr Samed responded on the reason for misstatements, using SANParks and SAWS as an example. He said in the previous year, SANParks had had misstatements and the CFO had taken accountability for that. SANParks and AGSA had worked hard to rectify this. However, it was within the control of the CFO to avoid misstatements but it became crucial -- and misstatements were likely to happen -- when there were vacancies for the posts of CFO and CEO. There had been a vacancy in the post of CFO at SANParks for nine months.

He said AGSA did engage with audit committees.

Prohibited suppliers meant suppliers on the National Treasury database with whom entities were not supposed to be doing business, or suppliers that had been blacklisted.

Mr Ramnanthan responded on the lack of competence on the part of the officials. He said that the officials may have the qualifications or experience but they needed to attend training to comply with the standards of accounting, legislation and frameworks when drafting their financial statements.

Mr Samed said the Portfolio Committee was doing well. However, there was a report yet to be published which described how all the portfolio committees were doing at the provincial level.

Ms Nosipho Ngcaba, Director General: DEA, said that the AG had presented the report to the President, and according to the report there had been a 70% improvement by all the entities in terms of audit outcomes.

The Chairperson said that the Committee looked forward to the report on order to have a working understanding of how the portfolio was doing. The Auditor-General’s office empowered the Departments. As such, he asked AGSA to make sure that there was clarity on the challenges and outcomes of the audit in the Departments.

Department of Environmental Affairs on its 2014/15 Annual Report 

The Chairperson told the Department that the Committee did not need to hear how they had performed, but how they had put corrective measures in place to deal with what had been highlighted by AGSA.

Ms Ngcaba said the DEA had dealt with some of the issues raised by the AGSA and assured the Committee that they would see the results in the next audit. The CFO for SANParks had been appointed in the year mentioned by AGSA, and SANParks had engaged with AGSA. However, she had had meetings with the AG to help SANBI review their interim financial statement. She also said that the DEA were struggling with disaster recovery. There was problem with business continuity, because whenever the Department moved from one system to another, there was a loss of information. However, the Department was working on IT governance.

On whether the Department had met its entire target or not, and the key challenges, she said that the annual performance plan tabled and approved by Parliament had had 169 targets, and 81 % had been achieved, 32% had been partially met and 5% had not been achieved. The challenges were arguably beyond the Department’s control.

On climate change, the Department depended on other departments for coordination and that was where the targets had not been met. Other challenges were financial constraints, basically because the Department relied on donor funds. Even though the donor funds were approved, it was hard to access them because of the processes involved

Programme 1: Administration

She said the Department had not met its target for filling vacancies. It had met only 10.4% of its target because of delays and challenges in filling posts in specialised skills/scientific fields. The other reason had been financial constraints and the need to reprioritise or delay the filling of some funded vacancies.

On employment equity, she reminded the Committee that the Department was one of those that had met the disability target, and that there had been over-achievement in that area. ‘

On the implementation of security risk assessment recommendations, the DEA had met only 61% of these against a target of 90%. On the number of funded Master System Plan (MSP) initiatives implemented, nine targets had been set but only two had been implemented, three partially implemented, two delayed, one was on hold and one had been cancelled. On air quality information systems, a 50% target had been set but had not been met because the regulations that would compel the authorities involved had been published only on 31 March.

Overall the Department met 90% of its targets, 4% had been partially achieved, and 6% had been off target.

Discussion

The Chairperson asked how the Department reconciled the fact that they had 99.9% of IT services availability, and that AGSA was complaining about it.

Mr T Hadebe (DA) asked what measures had been put in place to ensure that there was progress, even if there was vacancy in the post of the CFO.

Mr Mabilo asked if the Department could provide the Committee with the categories of the disabled people. What were the plans to achieve the targets not met?

Mr Makhubele asked what the role of peer-reviewed publications was in terms of transformation.

Mr Shelembe asked why it had taken the Department time to get someone to replace the CFO or CEO when there were vacancies.

The Chairperson asked if the DEA was satisfied with it staff at the senior management level.

Mr Makhubele asked how the Committee could deal with issues that were beyond the control of the DEA.

Mr Riaan Aucamp, Acting COO: DEA said the policy on IT had been reviewed by the AG in May 2012. The Department needed to review it, and it was a generic policy. It was also looking at a very new area called BYD – Bring Your own Devices policy. This policy posed more security risks, because one brought one’s own devices. As the DG had mentioned, the IT manager had been appointed and was currently working on these issues.

The Chairperson said that all entities must come back with their corrective measures on the IT issue raised by AGSA.

With regard to disability categorisation, Mr Riaan said it was a sensitive matter in the Department. 47 out of the 1 700 personnel were categorised as people with disabilities. Most of them had failed to disclose, based on the right to privacy, and the DEA had decided to not categorise them.

The Chairperson asked how they employed people if they did not know their disability status.

Ms Ngcaba said they declared it during employment, but did not want public exposure.

The Chairperson said that the disabled people felt they were being discriminated against.

Dr Monde Mayekiso, Deputy Director-General (DDG): Ocean and Coast, responded on peer reviewed publications in terms of transformation, and said that their scientists had published 26 papers, of which 40% had been published by a previously disadvantaged scientist.

Ms Ngcaba, on IT, said that the DEA would improve and update its indicators in order to address the problem mentioned by AGSA. On vacant posts in SANParks, she said there had been difficulties. However, in all the Departments there was succession planning, but there were constraints.

The Chairperson asked if the Department was stable, despite the difficulty in filling vacant positions.

Ms Ngcaba said the Department was stable, but the targets that had not been met were complex. For example, there were complexities in accessing funds timeously in respect of climate change.

Mr Makhubele asked how the issue of targets not being met should be treated by AGSA, when the reason was the inaccessibility of donor funding.

Mr Hadebe said that the Department should tell the Committee about the work it had done, and what it had not done, and the work for which it had received funding, and the areas where it had not.

The Chairperson told the Department to plan within the budget, even though it relied on donor funding. The Treasury must be made aware of this in order to release funds. He also said that they could not approve targets when the DEA relied on external funds.

Ms Ngcaba said that they knew there were complexities around donors. However, the targets they had presented had been approved by Parliament. The Department would work on the suggestion of the Committee. She reminded the Committee that the DEA’s function was a difficult one.

Programme 2: Legal Authorisations, Compliance and Enforcement

Ms Limpho Makotolo, Chief Director: Business Performance and Strategic Monitoring, DEA, said that the Department had met its targets for compliance and enforcement strategy by the environmental management inspectorate. There had been minor challenges in meeting the deadline for the review of the national strategy for the safety and security of the rhinoceros population. The challenge was mainly because the review had not been finalised by 31 March, but it had been finalised by April. The Department had met its target on Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with strategic government departments with regard to rhino poaching.

Discussion

Mr Mabilo asked why some key strategic government departments were not mentioned in the MOUs.

Mr Makhubele said that the DEA should elaborate on the partially achieved targets.

The Chairperson asked whether there had been a decrease or increase in the poaching and killing of rhinos. The Minister had complained that there had been an increase in rhino poaching, and he asked how the DEA was dealing with that.

Mr Ishaam Abader, DDG: Legal Authorisations and Compliance Inspectorate, said that the DEA had an MOU with the SA Police Service (SAPS). The Department had a colloquium where magistrates were trained. The Department also had a forum where they engaged with government stakeholders.

Ms Ngcaba said that the rhino issue was a difficult area where the DEA did not have all the solutions, although it had strategies. It was beyond the Department’s function, as it was a crime fighting issue. The situation would have been worse if there had been no strategy.

The Chairperson said that the community was not doing enough to resolve the problem. If the problem was not arrested, it could affect other big wild-life animals. Other relevant departments should be asked what they were doing to stop this poaching and killing.

Mr Abader said that the Department needed an opportunity to present to the Committee what they were doing about it. He added that SAPS were also doing something about it.

Mr Hadebe said the Committee needed the report of the Committee of Enquiry appointed in February with respect to rhino poaching.

Ms Ngcaba said the committee was still meeting to finalise its draft report before it would be presented to the Minister and the Inter-ministerial Committee (IMC), then to Cabinet before it came to the Portfolio Committee.

Programme 3: Oceans and Coasts

The Department had met its target on the implementation of an ocean management policy, but had not met its target on the implementation of a national framework for a national ocean and coastal spatial plan. The challenge had been a delay by key stakeholders to nominate members to serve on the Advisory Committee. The Department had partially met its target to increase the coastline under Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) with partial or full protection. However, that was being looked at. The Department had also partially met its target on two multi-disciplinary ocean functioning projects, which had not been completed within the timeframe.

Discussion

Mr Hadebe asked what amount of coastline was under partial protection.

Mr Mabilo asked how to ensure there was no marine poaching, in the absence of full protection.

Ms P Edwards (DA) asked about the plan to meet the partially achieved targets in the next financial year.

Dr Mayekiso, on how much coastline was under partial protection, said the DEA was aiming at 9.5% as full protection. It had achieved the partial protection percentage, but had fallen short on the full protection.

Mr Mabilo asked that Dr Mayekiso and his team give the Committee an assurance that there was protection in the marine protected areas, especially considering that encroachment happened at night.

The Chairperson asked if the DEA was willing to open the coastline to all South African citizens.

Dr Mayekiso said this was a troublesome issue. However, the DEA had started to prioritise certain provinces which it had identified as hotspots, and it would like to focus on providing access to the general public. There had been partial success in providing access to the local communities to oceans in the Eastern Cape.

Ms Ngcaba, on the ability of the DEA to protect marine resources, said that fishing rights were provided by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Whoever was fishing had to have a compliance and enforcement component, so that they could monitor the catch and how much was being taken out within the content of that permit. That was not the DEA’s work, however. For marine protected areas, the DEA was working with the coastal provinces. It had an agreement with the agencies in the Western, Eastern, and Northern Capes when providing permits.

The Chairperson asked how the Department was progressing in exploiting ocean and economic activities.

Programme 4: Climate Change and Air Quality
Ms Makotolo said the Department had not met its target on the draft National Carbon Sinks Atlas. The reason was not because of the absence of donor funding, but a delay in the contractual arrangement between the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) to finalise the funding agreement. That had been finalised, the money was available, and the project would be concluded in the next financial year. On the implementation of the Air Quality Act Regulatory framework, the challenge had been that a decision had been taken to publish it as a guideline, and not as a policy. However, guidelines had been processed for submission to the Executive Authority for approval and publication.

Discussion

Mr Makhubele asked whether the subsequent idea to change the policy review to guidelines had been made known to the Committee, as the Committee had expected a policy publication.

The Chairperson said that while moving around municipalities, the Committee had got the sense that there was a lack of capacity to implement air quality laws. Were there measures and interaction with the municipalities to ensure that any abnormalities were stopped?

Mr Alf Wills, DDG: Environmental Affairs, said that the change from policy to guidelines had been more of a realisation that the offset policy involved more than offsetting climate change. It was more about a broader environmental impact. The reason for the guidelines was to enable a biodiversity offset, an air quality offset, and a climate offset.

Ms Ngcaba said the Minister was empowered to make changes to the annual performance plan (APP). The DEA was aware of the problem of local government’s capacity to deal with environmental functions. It had a local government support strategy, and was engaging with municipalities. Where the municipalities lacked capacity, the provinces had the capacity to execute air quality licensing. 

Mr Makhubele said the DEA should support local government on environmental issues.

Ms Ngcaba said that there was a system in place that checked and made sure that there were no gaps in the air quality licensing capacity.

Mr Wills said there was a ten-point action plan to deal with that issue.

Programme 5: Biodiversity and Conservation

Ms Makotolo said that the establishment of one stewardship site in KZN had not been finalised in the financial year because of a delay in the finalisation of the process with stakeholders, but it would be finalised in the next financial year. The target for draft regulations for the registration of professional hunters and hunting outfitters had also not been met because of a delay in republishing of the comments made on the regulations for further public participation, based on legal advice. The draft norms and standards for the management of protected areas had not been finalised, but had been finalised in the first quarter of this financial year. The draft biodiversity sector analysis target had not been achieved, based on consultation challenges.

Discussion

Ms Edwards asked when the draft regulations for the registration of professional hunters and hunting outfitters would be finalised. What was reason for the delay over the norms and standards for the management of protected areas?

The Chairperson asked what the Department could do to solve the problems identified by AGSA. He said the DEA should support other entities to avoid misstatements.

Ms Wadzi Mandivenyi, Chief Director: Biodiversity Monitoring, said the Department was still engaging with the provinces over the finalisation of the Biodiversity Act. The problem with draft regulations for the registration of professional hunters was about who should apply for hunting rights -- whether it should be only South African citizens and permanent residents.

Ms Ngcaba said that the Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) regulations had been evolving, and the Minister had asked for an amendment based on public comments.

Mr Wills said one aspect of the biodiversity economic strategies was to take advantage of the international export opportunity for venison, where communities would be basically farming wild life and exporting the meat as venison into Europe and North America. The only problem would be meeting Europe’s health and safety standards.

Ms Ngcaba said there were welfare issues that bedevilled hunting. Supporting entities was tricky, since it concerned finance. However, the DEA participated in the audit committee of the entities only through the CFO of the Department.

The Chairperson said that the misstatement was really an issue, and something needed to be done.

Programme 6: Environmental Programmes

Ms Makotolo said that the creation of full time work equivalents had not been achieved because the programme had started late and the beneficiaries had had to work more than 23 days a month just to catch up. They had been excluded in accordance with the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) reporting system’s validation rules. The percentage of young people placed in exit opportunities through the Youth Environment Services (YES) programme target had also not been met. The DEA had targeted to place 858, but had placed 337. There had been a lack of placement opportunities as employers preferred unemployed graduates over young people with only a senior certificate and one year of training. The target for implementation of a legal instrument on interventions for streamlining environmental authorisations had also not been finalised because the commencing period was in December, and the Department had both time and financial constraints.

Discussion

Ms Edwards congratulated the DEA on their achievements with this programme. What were the reasons for the programmes not completed? What were the measures to avert these challenges? Had there been engagement with the private sector in regard to placement of these young people?

Mr Makhubele asked whether the young people had been placed in the private or government sectors.

The Chairperson asked if there were huge opportunities to maximise these kinds of programmes.

Dr Guy Preston, Deputy Director-General: Environmental Programmes, said there were opportunities for maximising the programmes, and these would be presented to the Committee in due course. On the YES programme, he said the placement was done in both the government and private sector.

Ms Ngcaba said the Department could find the names of those who had been placed, but not where they had been placed. She also said there were opportunities, but these were threatened by audit outcomes.

Programme 7: Chemicals and Waste Management

Ms Makotolo said that the Health Care Risk Waste management regulations target had not been met. The reason was the delay in gazetting the regulations because of pending issues between the DEA and Department of Health. The finalisation of the norms and standards for the validation of the treatment, efficacy and operation of a non-combustion technology used to treat health care risk waste had not been achieved for the same reason. The targeted 80% licensing of unlicensed waste disposal sites had not been met because of financial constraints. A study on the impact of the Minamata Convention on Mercury had not been finalised because of financial constraints.

Discussion

Ms Edwards asked how many of the previously unlicensed sites had been licensed. When did the DEA envision that they would all be licensed?

Mr Mabilo asked the Department to shed more light on the draft export and import regulations. He asked which sector they would be targeting in that area.

Mr Mark Gordon, DDG: Chemicals and Waste Management, said there had been a backlog of 341 unlicensed sites two years ago. This had been brought down to 57. Dealing with the backlog had cost a lot. Licensing was done by the provinces. The DEA was fast-tracking the process and envisioned that it would be completed within a few months. The DEA conducted surveys to prevent illegal sites developing and did work with the provinces to check whether the illegal sites were being closed down. The DEA was also taking legal action against offenders.

Mr Obed Baloyi, Chief Director: Chemicals Management, responded on the draft export and import regulations, and said that most of the imported goods turned out to be hazardous waste. The export and import regulations tried to cover that gap.

Ms Ngcaba said that once authorisation has been given for sites to be licensed, that was not enough. Only when it had been properly fenced and other requirements had been met could it be termed an appropriately managed facility. A closure certificate was an issue in some instances.

Mr Makhubele asked whether tyres were recycled by the private sector or government.

Mr Mabilo said there were a lot of tyres still lying around. He asked if DEA was able to regulate, account or monitor hazardous waste from industry. What was DEA doing on dumping sites?

Mr Hadebe asked the procedure to be followed for sites to be licensed, since there were many illegal sites.

The Chairperson said vegetation was dying because of illegal mine dumps. Communities that lived around these mine dumps were complaining. What was the plan for the mine dumps? Where was the DEA in dealing with asbestos?

Mr Gordon, responding on the tyre issue, said the tyre recycling plan had been approved by the Minister. The DEA did the monitoring and oversight of the plan. The money collection was done through the private sector. Some tyres were coming in illegally, but the DEA was curtailing that. Tyres were not hazardous waste, but were classified as general waste. Hazardous waste was managed by the private sector. On the issue of dumping sites, there were illegal, unlicensed and licensed sites. Unlicensed sites were not necessary illegal sites. The DEA had closed down some sites because they were in the wrong place. Compliance and enforcement of legal requirements on the sites was done by the provinces. The DEA did not license illegal sites.

Mine dumps did not fall under the DEA’s mandate, and was an area that had been neglected for many years. However, it was within the ambit of the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) to close them.

The issue of asbestos involved the relocation of communities from where they lived. Many of them did not want to move, preferring that the DEA did the work while they were there. Treasury was also looking at the situation because the main problem was financial constraints.

Mr Makhubele asked why money was being spent on sites which were not in compliance with the regulations.

The Chairperson said that the Department should report back on the IT corrective measures, as mentioned by AGSA. The Committee would not delve into the financial matters with the Department, but would take them as audited by AGSA.

The Committee would still deal with the impact of the strategies to deal with wild life crime, and would meet with other portfolio committees on the mine dumps, transforming the coastline, providing access to citizens, and hold discussions on threatened and protected species.

South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) on its 2014/15 Annual Report
The Chairperson asked the Department to tell the Committee how they were dealing with the issues raised by AGSA.

Ms Carmel Mbivzo, Acting CEO, SANBI, said the entity had had 48 targets, of which 44 had been achieved, two partially achieved and two not achieved. The target of 60% placement of qualifying staff on a horticulturist career path had partially been met. 29 horticulturists had been identified and placed. 45% of Employment Equity (EE) targets were achieved. Management responsibility for new the Limpopo Garden, from Limpopo Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) to SANBI, and the acquisition of land by SANBI for the establishment of the new Eastern Cape Garden, had not been achieved.

Mr Alan Smith, Director: Finance, said the Department had received an unqualified audit opinion. SANBI had corrected the issues raised by AGSA on financial disclosure and performance information, and it was in the annual report. A standard operating mechanism was under way, and the Department was working on its reporting.

Discussion

The Chairperson said that the financials would be taken as audited by the AGSA.

Mr Makhubele asked what the 60% partial achievement meant, and how much was involved in the financial disclosure issue.

Ms Mbivzo said that the total number of horticulturists was 29. The Department had hoped that 60% would have been placed on a career path, but they had not been placed because the Department was still doing assessments.

The Chairperson said that in other words, nothing had been achieved, since none had been placed. It had not been partially achieved, as they had claimed. He said they should be meticulous and make sure that the negative findings by the AGSA did not repeat themselves.

Mr Smith said that the entity was working on policies to help curtail the misstatements.

The Chairperson asked that the action plan being put in place for the avoidance of misstatements be presented to the Committee.

Ms Mbivzo said they have the plan, but that it was very long.

The Chairperson said they should have started with it, but should now send it to the Committee.  He asked where they were on the Limpopo Gardens.

Ms Mbivzo said the matter had been resolved and the land now belonged to SANBI.

The Chairperson asked when the horticulturists would be placed.

Mr Maano Netshiombo, Chief Director: Human Resources, said they were still assessing and hoped they would be placed by the end of this month.

The Chairperson asked the timeline for the achievement of this placement, and the corrective measures for achieving them.

Mr Makhubele said SANBI should write to the Committee on the matter.

The Chairperson thanked the Department. He urged all entities to work very hard so as not to be on the same level they were this financial year. He urged them to avoid misstatements and to adhere closely to Generally Recognised Accounting Practice (GRAP), as they reported to AGSA.

Consideration and Adoption of the Fourth Term Programme, 2015

The Chairperson told the Committee Members that they would work in terms of the proposed programme that was available to them.

The meeting was adjourned.