The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) presented the Annual Report 2014/15 for the Communal Property Associations (CPAs). To date, 1 428 CPAs were registered, with 48 being registered in the last financial year. Challenges faced by CPAs included ongoing conflicts amongst CPA members which centred on governance issues, and the fact that some CPAs were insolvent and needed an injection of funds to put them on a sound footing. 29 CPAs were untraceable, 20 CPAs had lost (through sale or loss by attachment) 10 668 hectares of land, and nine CPAs were under administration. Compliant CPAs were those that updated the membership list, had a valid constitution, held regular AGMs and elections, and submitted annual reports to the Director General. 147 CPAs, involving 411 195 hectares of land, were referred to the Land Rights Management Facility (LRMF) for regularisation. 40 had been regularised to date, including 12 in 2014/15. 65 cases were pending, and 42 were unable to be regularised and were sent back to the Department. R6 158 556 was disbursed by LRMF for CPAs Panel funds in this financial year. National compliance trends and pending cases were summarised by province. The interventions and turnaround strategies included mediation, training, regularisation, judicial administration and recapitalisation. 26 CPAs were being assisted through the Recapitalisation and Development Programme (RADP) and R166 468 012 had been budgeted for that. An amendment was to be proposed to the CPA Act, to enhance protection. Operational personnel responsible for CPAs had been appointed in all provinces, as more support was needed for the CPAs.
Members questioned the Department’s inconsistency in the writing of reports, commenting that they would like to see a comparison of targets and performance, and wanted to know more the strategies to overcome the challenges of the CPAs. They asked how long it would take to conclude the investigation on the untraceable lands and wondered if there should not be a requirement that the CPAs must inform the Department before putting up land as collateral. They asked if anyone with business background and experience was mentoring or in touch with the CPAs, and whether workshops were conducted to familiarise the CPAs with the schedules. They asked why there were conflicts between the annual reports of the DRDLR and the CPAs, in relation to numbers of registered CPAs in Gauteng, and asked about mechanisms for capacity building. Specific questions were asked about the Seloane claim in Mabowane, Ingonyama claims, Opermans Mandei CPA, and the status of the Kwaku CPA. Members were concerned that so much had been spent on recapitalisation and commented that the Department seemed to be deviating from its core functions. Members highlighted the need for training of CPA members. They asked that the Extension of Security of Land Tenure Act amendments should be fast tracked. They asked for an indication of the beneficiaries of the Land Rights Management Facility. They welcomed improvement in the numbers of compliant CPAs, but noted that merely throwing money at the CPAs would not suffice and concerted efforts including a possible best practice model were needed to ensure compliance. They asked where the recapitalisation budget was spent, on administration or capital improvements, and asked when the Committee would get the report on socio-economic impact of the CPAs. They asked that the Department try to stop sales of land, and if it was to be disposed of, it should come back to the state. Members questioned why certain of the CPAs had been recapitalised despite apparent anomalies.
The Department then briefed the Committee on specific CPAs – the first being Rama, which had not complied with the provisions of the Act and the Regulations, despite the Department having held a number of meetings with it to try to correct the situation. An AGM had been planned for 26 September, but some Members sought and obtained an interdict. A settlement agreement was reached on 25 September, which called on the CPA Committee to call the AGM within 60 days, and gave the Department the power to get access to the CPA accounts and bank statements, which meant it would not have to pursue an application for administration. Should the notices not be published or the meeting not held (and there were some concerns that 25 November, the chosen date, was within a festival period) then the Department could take over. Security arrangements had been made.
The Department also gave a progress report on the Riemvasmaak Community Trust .The Provincial Shared Service Centre (PSSC) in Northern Cape had assisted Mr Freddie Bosman and the Community of Riemvasmaak to call a meeting on 26 September 2015, which was asking that the legal entity change from a Trust to a CPA. However, there had been confusion as to who must take this process forward and Mr Bosman, contrary to his intention to propose the change from Trust to CPA, insisted that new trustees must be appointed to achieve a quorum in the Trust. Elections were held and he was not elected as Chairperson or a Deputy Chairperson, and seemed to have lost interest. There were concerns that the Department had been supporting Mr Bosman, perceived as splitting the community, but the Department had met with members to try to resolve the existence of parallel trustee committees. The Department would now be making a final attempt to establish a CPA election steering Committee to facilitate the establishment of the CPA, but political intervention would be needed if that steering Committee failed.
Members suggested that the Committee should attend the Rama AGM on 25 November, and said it would be useful for someone other than the Departmental officials to act as a facilitator. Members questioned if the department had access to the books and if there had been a meeting between the DRDLR and the Trust since Mr Bosman had ceased to be the leader. They expressed concerns over the organisation of Rama CPA and the books, but felt that the court order granting access was a positive step. Members suggested that perhaps the Department should interdict the Trust from further doing anything on the land.
Members adopted the minutes of the meeting on 28 October 2015.
The Chairperson welcomed Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, Ms Candith Mashego-Dlamini, who tendered apologies from the other Deputy Minister, Mr Mcebisi Skwatsha. The Committee Secretary noted the apologies of Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, Mr Gugile Nkwinti, who was attending a Cabinet meeting.
Communal Property Associations (CPA) Annual Report: 2014-2015: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) briefing
Mr Jeff Sebape, Acting Chief Director, Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, presented the Communal Property Associations (CPA) Annual Report for 2014/15. To date, 1 428 CPAs were registered altogether, with 48 CPAs were registered in the financial year 2014/15.The distribution of CPAs per Province was: Eastern Cape 15%, Free State 4%, Gauteng 3%, KwaZulu Natal 25%, Limpopo 11%, Mpumalanga 24%, Northern Cape 5%, North West 11% and Western Cape 2%.
The main challenges faced by CPAs included ongoing conflicts amongst CPA members which centred on governance issues like accountability, or financial mismanagement. Some CPAs were insolvent and needed an injection of funds to put them on a sound footing. Nine CPAs were under judicial Administration for administrative or financial reasons, for periods ranging from six months to three years.
He repeated that 48 CPAs were registered in 2014-15, and in that period 29 CPAs were untraceable. 20 CPAs lost 10 668 hectares of land. Nine CPAs were under administration. He explained that untraceable CPAs were those that were registered and never owned land, or whose members could not be located as investigations were ongoing. CPAs that lost land were those that either sold land or whose land was lost to creditors.
Compliant CPAs were defined as those that updated their membership lists, had a valid constitution, held regular AGMs, held elections and submitted annual reports to the Director General.
Mr Sebape reported on the Land Rights Management Facility (LRMF) referrals. These referrals were done for the purposes of regularisation. Regularisation was a process which involved mediation and assisting a CPA to undertake processes that would make it compliant. In this financial year, 147 CPAs were referred to the LRMF for regularisation, and their land comprised 411 195 hectares of land. 40 CPAs had been regularised to date and 12 of these took place in 2014/15. 65 cases were pending. 42 cases could not be regularised and were referred back to the Department.
National Compliance Trends figures were compared: In 2009/10: 100. In 2011/12:158. In 2012/13: 209. In 2013/14: 171 and in the last financial year of 2014/15: 284.
The CPA provincial distributions were set out:
North West 13, Northern Cape 10, Western Cape 8, Eastern Cape 7, KwaZulu Natal 6, Free State 3, Mpumalanga 11, Gauteng 3, and Limpopo 4.
Pending matters involving CPAs were also noted. In Phase one there was one case in each of Eastern Cape, Gauteng, KwaZulu Natal, Limpopo and three cases in Northern Cape.
In Phase 2 there were also pending matters; Eastern Cape had 6, Free State 2, KZN 5, Limpopo 3, Mpumalanga 11, Northern Cape 10 and Western Cape 8.
Speaking to the financial report, he noted that a total of R6 158 556 was disbursed by LRMF for CPAs Panel funds between April 2014 and March 2015.
He described the interventions or turnaround strategies for the CPAs as follows:
- Mediation: The Department mediated and resolved 87 CPAs disputes during the reporting period
- Training: 56 CPAs were trained on governance matters as 147 officials had been trained on the CPA Act and dispute resolution
- Regularisation: 12 CPAs were regularised through LRMF and were now legally compliant
- Judicial Administration: 9 CPAs had been placed under judicial administration and this had put the CPAs on the back-foot as some CPAs had requested for out of court settlement
- Recapitalisation: 26 CPAs were being assisted through the Recapitalisation and Development Programme(RADP) and R166 468 012 had been budgeted for it. The CPA recapitalisation figures per province were set out in the presentation (see attached document)
- Legislation: The draft CPA Amendment Bill proposes amendments to the Act to enhance the protection of members’ rights. The Bill was being processed for approval, but its impact would only be determined after promulgation and implementation
- Operational Capacity: Directors and operational personnel responsible for CPAs had been appointed in all provinces, as more support was provided to CPAs.
Mr Mduduzi Shabane, Director General, Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, said that not all of the CPAs were land compliant as it was about their capacity. He noted that sometimes the people were brought together to form a common legal entity as the existing generation had been people who had not lived together as a homogeneous entity. He remarked that the majority of the CPAs wanted to eke out a living from their land, and found the need to supply documentation as particularly onerous. The most popular CPAs were those who had taken the Department to court. The Department had set up a directorate in each province where there had been lacking in the past, as some dedicated capacities would assist in providing training to help the CPAs to comply.
Ms Vuyi Nxasana, Acting Deputy Director General: Land Tenure Administration, DRDLR, added that in the past, the Department had measured itself on regularised CPAs; and had been considering if the CPA was the right vehicle to land ownership. She too referred to the amendments to the CPA Act and said that the Social Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) was being concluded, and would be finalised by the middle of November 2015.
The Chairperson commented that the Department should be consistent in writing its reports as there many inconsistencies between the previous year's report ad this one.
Mr Shabane said that he had taken note of that point.
Ms A Qikani (ANC) said there were many challenges in the CPAs and wondered if there were strategies to overcome them, particularly since these challenges had been ongoing for some time.
Mr Shabane replied that the scope of the Land Rights Management Facility had been extended as it was more involved now than in the past. Other turnaround strategies included provision of support, mediation and training of the CPA officials.
Deputy Minister Mashego-Dlamini added that the Department was embarking on a fresh verification exercise, to ensure that the CPAs had not become business entities. She remarked that some CPAs had used part of the land as collateral for loans from the banks, without the consent of the other members,and then the land was lost to the banks when they failed to honour the debts. The banks did not cooperate with the Department and there were ongoing negotiations with the Land Bank, since it was a government entity. In addition there were cases where CPA had sold off their land by corrupt means, and many cases were pending in the courts.
Ms Qikani asked how long it would take to conclude the investigation on the untraceable lands.
Mr Sebape replied that investigations were ongoing but he could not say when these would be concluded as they were mostly old cases that had started when the Department was created.
Ms Qikani asked how the workshops were conducted in the CPA, as the people seemed to have no understanding of their jobs.
Mr Sebape replied that the Department did not want to want to train those who had only a few months left of their term of office; it would rather train those who had more than five years still to run in their term in office.
Mr M Filtane(UDM) asked if during training, and in the constitution of the CPAs, people were apprised of the need to convey information to the Department – such as not using the land as collaterals for loans from the banks. The land was surely held in trust for the community.
The Deputy Minister replied that the training of CPA members could not be a hit and run affair, and pointed out that the various people concerned had different levels of qualifications.
Mr Filtane asked if the Department had established why so many lands suddenly became untraceable and why many provinces had benefited from recapitalisation, yet Eastern Cape had been left out.
Mr Shabane replied that there were over 1 700 beneficiaries and all the nine Provinces had benefitted from recapitalisation. He said the Department apologised if a contrary impression had been created. He was willing to submit a new report to show that the other provinces had also benefited.
Mr Samuel Mogaswa, Deputy Director: Communal Property Institution, DRDLR, added that one of the requirements for a CPA to be recapitalised was that it had to be compliant with legislation.
Mr Filtane questioned if people with a business background and practical experience were in touch with the CPA on a regular basis; it was experience that toughened people rather than just qualifications.
Mr Shabane replied that the Department did not have many people in business that could mentor the CPA members. However, the Department had a programme called “rural enterprise component” which was helping the CPAs to get the required experience.
The Deputy Minister added that as a short term solution the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) was assisting, but in the long term the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform would require in-house agricultural economists, as most of the businesses were agriculture-related.
Mr T Mhlongo (DA) remarked that there were conflicts in the DRDLR Annual Report and the CPA Annual Report regarding the number of CPAs registered in Gauteng.
Mr E Nchabeleng (ANC) said it was a good report even though there were some glitches. He commented that some CPAs were “like children left on their own,” adding that the Department should come up with the mechanism for capacity building. He asked if there were more than one Seloane claim in Limpopo as the one he was aware of had not been settled, and he asked why not.
Mr Mogaswa replied that it was the Seloane in Kanawa, and not the one in Mabowane, whose claim had been settled, and that Ngwanayi CPA elected new executives who had confused tribal with CPA affairs, which created problems of accountability.
Mr Nchabeleng said he had information that the Ingonyama claim was having challenges, and he asked about its relationship with the Department and if there was any progress report on this issue.
Mr Shabane replied that the Department would follow up with the Chief Land Claims Commissioner (CLCC) on the challenges between the Department and the CPA, and what the DRDLR could do to assist.
Mr T Walters (DA) said a lot of money had been spent on recapitalisation and he was concerned that it was drawing a lot of resources from the Department, and also caused the DRDLR to now deviate from its core function. He questioned what the Department had in mind for legislation to change the situation.
Mr Shabane replied that historically, when land reform started in 1996, the focus was to return the land to the people. As time went on, there was a shift from social justice to economic justice, as people began to own land as an economic asset. The DRDLR had begun to separate the land governance from the business that was being done on the land. There were over 1 400 CPAs and the Department was assisting to ensure that land governance was separated from the business enterprises, as the rural economic transformation was properly implemented.
Mr P Mnguni (ANC) said that in politics, it was important to be entirely accurate and he agreed with the Chairperson’s concerns about the inconsistencies in reporting. The norm when drawing an annual report was to set out the targets and compare these to actual performance, which made it easier to identify the challenges. This report did not do that, and he advised that this should be pointed out in the Committee's recommendations. He commented that CPAs should be trained as they were empowered, as the absence of training would result in a lot of in-fighting. He said the Amendment Bill to the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA) should be fast tracked as the DRDLR needed to work on closing all the loopholes to avoid the frustrations that were encountered in the RAMA CPA.
Ms Nxasana replied that the Amendment Bill was largely technical, as prevention strategies were basically around resources. Prevention was achieved by putting structures in place detailing how decisions were made. In the training manual, there was a selection continuum, so that people could make those choices, and this was part of the turnaround strategy, together with a form of regularisation, speaking to what had gone wrong and what could be done to correct it. Had the Department been measured with the correct tools, it would have exceeded the target. For the future, the DRDLR had a more accurate target, which was to ensure that many of the 1 425 CPAs were compliant.
Mr A Madella (ANC) asked for an indication on the beneficiaries of the Land Rights Management Facility. He welcomed the improvement in the number of CPAs that had become compliant, and asked what measures were in place to help all the CPAs become so compliant. He was concerned that five provinces had been singled out for recapitalisation, but the other four were not considered worthy. He asked for updates on specific CPAs, like the Opermans Mandei, and questioned what the Department was doing to help them as the true beneficiaries had been squeezed out of their lands.
Mr Mosagwa replied that the mediation on Opermans Mandei Community was ongoing and the Department would resort to the courts if that failed.
Mr L Mbinda (PAC) asked what percentage of the CPAs were enjoying the additional support of directors and operational personnel.
Mr S Matiase (EFF) asked for details on the status of Kwaku CPA. He said CPAs had come into being as a result of an Act of Parliament, and it was sad to hear that there were unintended consequences, but it was also very upsetting that these consequences had not been foreseen. He asserted that throwing money into CPAs would not result in efficiency, as there was a need to advise the Board to find alternative mechanisms to return lands to the people, rather than rely on feudal ways of doing so. The elite were those who ended up as beneficiaries. He said that the best mechanism must be found that took account of the proper role of the CPAs, so that they would not be misrun and mismanaged, as was happening currently. He asked if the Department could give a model of a good CPA which could be used as a benchmark.
The Deputy Minister said that every South African had a right to own land, and so everyone was qualified to be a beneficiary. She said that there was a need to amend the legislation so that the DRDLR would come up with a proper model for CPAs. The legislation was new, as the Department was learning and improving. Amendment was an indication that DRDLR was learning new things, and she noted that there was no restitution that had been done in South Africa without support. She added that the report could not be submitted directly to the Committee, as it was a requirement, before any legislation was presented, that it be presented to Cabinet for approval.
Mr Mhlongo asked how many CPAs were in Gauteng, as the information could not be confirmed. He also asked how much was used for compliance and the workshop, adding that value for money was important as this report was only given on five out of nine provinces.
Mr Filtane said the Director General had given the history of the CPA as it was conceptualised. He asked if the R166 468 012 budgeted for recapitalisation was for enterprises or administration. He wanted to know the strategy to separate the CPAs from business. He questioned when the Committee would receive the report on the socio-economic impact of the CPAs, which should show the returns on the investment the government was making.
Mr Shabane replied that the bulk of the funds would go into infrastructure and farming input.
Mr Madella said it was important to get a report on the land that had been lost, adding that the CPA should avoid the sale of the land, as lands should rather come back to the state.
Mr Shabane replied that the Department would produce the reports. He noted that Rama CPA ,although it was not an ideal model, had shown that where governance and business were mixed there would always be conflict, and illustrated the need to separate the two.
Mr Nchabeleng said the Department should speed up the process of conducting a workshop so as to have the opportunity to speak to the people, and be aware of the challenges they faced. He asked when the Committee was visiting the Department for an orientation.
Mr Mnguni asked if the R166 468 012 budgeted for recapitalisation was for a turnaround, or the current financial year. He noted, from the Department’s Annual Report, that only Mokhachane was compliant and questioned why Itekeng Chicken Abattoir and Bethany were awarded funds for recapitalisation as they were not compliant.
Mr Mogaswa replied that the two CPAs were among the projects being recapitalised, as it was identified that they were not compliant. This necessitated that the guidelines were revised to make them compliant before recapitalisation.
Mr Mnguni said information before the Committee on Shigalo CPA in Limpopo was to the effect that the farm had been leased out to a white farmer. He also questioned why it was awarded funds for recapitalisation.
Mr Sebape replied that the Shigalo CPA was excluded from the R166 468 012 as it was tagged “in progress”
The Chairperson asked if comprehensive conflict management was working. She said the Department had said it would establish a training management facility in 2011-2012, which it had failed to achieve to date.
Ms Nxasana replied that the LRMF in 2008 was only for land rights infringement. In 2011 there was a breakdown to a communal tenure. The training unit of the Department had recognised the growing need for training to address the needs of the beneficiaries.
The Chairperson asked how long the investigations would take, as the numbers of “untraceable” claims in 2013/14 and 2014/2015 were still at 29.
Mr Sebape replied that the Department could not give a definite answer, as there were challenge, particularly since the CPAs concerned were old.
The Chairperson aligned himself with Mr Mnguni's concerns and also and questioned why CPAs that were not compliant were considered to have qualified for recapitalisation.
Mr Shabane remarked that a recent Constitutional Court judgement praised the CPA Act as a visionary piece of legislation, in an attempt to democratise Land Use Association.
Mr Mhlongo said the Committee wanted updates on Malamala CPA.
The Deputy Minister responded that a report was recently brought before the Committee on Malamala.
Mr Nchabeleng asked for the criteria for the jobs in the provinces as people were hired and not able to perform the duties, adding that the answer could be provided in the next meeting if it was not available now.
Rama Communal Property Association: Departmental briefing
Mr Samuel Mogaswa, Acting Director, Communal Property Institution (CPI), briefed the Portfolio Committee on the Rama Communal Property Association. He said it had previously been reported that the CPA had not complied with the provisions of the Act and the Regulations. The Department had held a number of meetings with the CPA members with the aim of correcting the situation. As part of the preparations, the Community had chosen an interim structure to work with the Department, to facilitate the AGM which had been planned for 26 September 2015. On 22 September 2015, papers were filed by the Committee, interdicting the AGM from going ahead. The matter was settled by agreement on 25 September 2015. The CPA Committee must, in terms of that settlement, call the AGM within 60 days. The order had also given DRDLR access to the CPA accounts. The CPA Constitution stipulated a notice period of 14 days and said that notices of the AGM must be published in the local newspaper, Motsweding FM and on the Notice boards in Madidi and Ga Rankuwa. SAPS and the local security officials were engaged with to ensure the safety of all people who attended the CPA meetings. The court order also gave the DRDLR the authority to call the AGM, if the Committee failed to call it within 60 days as the Provincial Shared Service Centre (PSSC) Gauteng was facilitating meetings with affected parties in preparation for the AGM. These preparations included nominations, logistics, security and elections. The Department was now able to obtain access to the CPA bank statements, through the court order of 25 September 2015, and the DRDLR would save on legal costs by negating the need to pursue the pending application for administration.
Riemvasmaak Community Trust: Departmental briefing
Mr Obed Mvula, Chief Director, Provincial Shared Service Centre, DRDLR, gave the Committee the Progress Report on Riemvasmaak Community Trust .He said that, following the agreement with the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform, the PSSC, Northern Cape had assisted Mr Freddie Bosman and the Community of Riemvasmaak to call a meeting on 26 September 2015.The purpose of the meeting was to request the Community to change its legal entity from a Trust to a Communal Property Association. This meeting was attended by 250 community members from Vredesvallei and Sending.
Since the last meeting of the Portfolio Committee of 12 August 2015 very little had been achieved in taking the Trust forward, as there was still confusion as to who was responsible for its administration. Mr Bosman had promised he would get the community to take a resolution to change the legal entity to a CPA , but instead he did the opposite, as he had insisted that new trustees should be elected to fill the vacancy in the current Trust in order to achieve a quorum. The elections were conducted, and a Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson were elected; Mr Bosman then seemed to have lost interest when he was not elected to one of these positions.
Complaints had been lodged. On 25 September 2015, Mr Mvula had received a telephone call and an email from Mr Armando Damarah, complaining that the Department was supporting Mr Bosman to split the community. A meeting was held with Mr Damarah and Maphanga in Kimberley, on 02 October 2015, in an attempt to resolve the existence of the two parallel trustee committees. It was agreed to call a meeting of the two groups with the Master of the High Court to try to reach a joint solution. The recommendation was now that a last attempt should be made by the Department to establish a CPA Election Steering Committee, to facilitate the establishment of the CPA, and if this should fail, then a political intervention would be needed.
Mr Mhlongo proposed that the Committee should attend the Rama AGM on 25 November, as a Committee, and he added that somebody other than the Department should perhaps act as presenter, in order to facilitate a better outcome.
Mr Shabane replied that 25 November was a festive season and he did not know if it was the best time, as people might say that the AGM was called when no one was available.
Mr Madella questioned if the Department now had access to the books and if there had been a meeting between the Department and the Trust since Mr Bosman ceased to be the leader.
Mr Nchabeleng questioned the life of the organisation Rama CPA and was concerned about what had been done to the books.
Mr Mnguni said there was good progress on Rama CPA but there was a disjunct between the last version and the current one. The order given had now granted the Department access to the account. He proposed that, in the amendment of the Act, the option of a CPA should be chosen rather than a Trust.
Mr Filtane appreciated the development on Rama CPA, adding that the Department should interdict the Trust from doing anything further on the land, as there were no legal ways of dealing with the Trust.
Mr Shabane replied that the problems Mr Mvula had faced were very disappointing, as Mr Bosman had a personal agenda. There was a need for a competent mediator who was going to be available for all the work to be done. If the previous executives of Rama CPA failed to come on the 25 November, then the Department could move in and take over.
Ms Rachel Masango, Chief Director, DRDLR, said that the Department was at the beck and call of the Rama CPA Committee, and added that the CPA had not set the date, so that the Department would communicate with the Committee if it was held.
The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister and the officials of the Department. She appreciated the progress report on Rama CPA, but was disappointed that Mr Bosman had apparently had a personal agenda all along.
She reminded the Department that the Committee was awaiting its progress report on untraceable lands as well as the annual performance plan, which should be clear and specific to hold units accountable. She said the Committee was also expecting the CPA Amendment Bill, and noted that there should be improvement on CPAs as the staff at the provincial level had increased. She added that the Committee was also expecting progress reports on LRMF, CPAs in Malamala, Modemolle, the status of Kwaku CPA as well as progress on Rama CPA after 25 November, and strategies to resolve the Trust.
Adoption of minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 28 October 2015 were adopted, with minor amendments.
The meeting was adjourned.
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.