Oceans Economy programme & Green Building framework of Department of Public Works

Meeting report

Oceans Economy programme of Department of Public Works
Mr Dhaya Govender, DPW Director-General, explained that the Operation Phakisa approach aims at fast-tracking implementation through rigorous monitoring and issue resolution. It places great emphasis on public accountability. It is very specific in its focus on multi-sector involvement in planning and implementation related to complex national development challenges requiring unconventional solutions. The approach aims to implement solutions to critical development issues highlighted in the National Development Plan (NDP). It is also utilised as a methodology to ensure that projects aimed at meeting targets set in government’s Medium-Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) are fast tracked.

South Africa is bordered by the ocean on three sides. In 2010 the ocean contributed approximately R54 billion to South Africa’s GDP and accounted for approximately 316,000 jobs. The ocean has the potential to contribute up to R177 billion to GDP and between 800 and 1 million direct jobs. These growth levers reflect at least 4% annual growth in both GDP contribution and job creation. This demonstrates the need for long term economic development programmes to include coast and ocean resources as compared to focusing on land resources only.

The following four focus areas have been selected as new growth areas in the ocean economy:
- Marine transport and manufacturing activities, such as coastal shipping, transhipment, boat building, repair and refurbishment
- Offshore oil and gas exploration
- Aquaculture and
- Marine protection services and ocean governance .

South Africa has about 3000km of coastline with a total of twelve proclaimed fishing harbours located in the Western Cape with Lambert Bay on the west side up to Still Bay in the southern part of the province. There are also approximately 50 potential and existing unproclaimed harbours in the Eastern Cape, Kwazulu-Natal, Northern Cape and Western Cape. The small harbours (proclaimed and unproclaimed) have a significant role to play in the socio-economic development of the communities where they are located; and they could contribute into growing the bigger maritime economy. Despite their socio-economic significance small harbours are also critical in maintaining security and territorial integrity of the country. These harbours constitute part of the candidates of new Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIP) under the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission. The strategic intent of the Small Harbours Lab/Focus Area is to contribute to radical economic transformation of the Oceans Economy through:
- Providing safety, security and territorial integrity to the Republic
- Fostering an inclusive development of Ocean Economy at grass-root level       
- Providing social infrastructure solutions from water-side (Example: Port St Johns to Mthatha).
- Providing Small Harbours as domestic harbours under cabotage (reserving of transportation of goods domestically to indigenous ship owners) in sea transport
- Fostering SA indigenous shipping industry
- Creating SA ship building /repair industry targeting fishing vessels
- Development of SA Small Harbours will also serve as a model for the development of the broader African Ocean Economy as declared by the African Union.

The development themes of small harbours are as follows: safety, security and territorial integrity. Due to the fact that South Africa has a long coastline, which forms part of its borders, there have been a number of reported illegal activities taking place within the small harbours, which demonstrate the need to address safety and security challenges. Studies support the fact that small harbours can actually contribute immensely to the local economy where these harbours are located. The proclaimed harbours already provide for employment in the following sectors: fishing industry, fish landing facilities, primary fish processing, cold storage, ice making. Small harbours have a potential to boost the tourism industry through restaurants, curio shops, maritime leisure, maritime museum and water recreation and sports. Some small harbours have intensive fish processing facilities and other industrial activities making them significant economic nodes.

Small Harbours Development will provide a platform for grass-root inclusion to the Ocean Economy especially through the focused programmes on youth employment, small business and cooperatives in the coastal area especially rural communities. This is important considering the support required for existing small scale and subsistence fishery and aquaculture. The development of the small harbours will also have a positive effect on the local communities where they can use the same facilities as a solution to their socio-economic infrastructure challenges particularly transportation where road access is inefficient. In accordance with the Government Immovable Assets Management Act (GIAMA), DPW is the custodian of government immovable assets. DPW will pursue the review of the Policy Basis during 2016 in order to amend GIAMA to ensure a sound legislative framework for including Small Harbours as National Assets.

DPW has established a Small Harbours Development Unit to facilitate the development and modernisation of small harbours. The Unit is located in the Office of the Director General in line with the Operation Phakisa Framework. DPW will also mobilise collaborative efforts from different spheres of government, business, academia, and civil society in accelerating the growth of South Africa’s ocean economy.

The focus of DPW in 2015/16 to 2016/17 was on capital and maintenance projects which have been identified in the 12 proclaimed harbours through the Spatial Economic Development Frameworks (SEDFs). Stakeholder engagement was undertaken during the development process. Initial critical infrastructure and maintenance projects to the value of R400 million are to be completed by 2019. The scope of the work includes repairs and upgrade of slipways; shore crane replacements; dredging of harbour basins; repairs to wooden jetties; removal of sunken vessels; security installation and operations; and infrastructure repairs. There would also be a focus on the following:
- Implementation of Spatial and Economic Development Frameworks (SEDFs) for the 12 Proclaimed Fishing Harbours which were completed in 2014
- Identify and prepare SEDFs and proclaim all remaining small harbours along South Africa’s coastline (40 identified to date)
- Audit all State coastal reserves falling under the custodianship of Public Works
- Unlock land in both proclaimed and unproclaimed harbours for aquaculture projects, as well as associated business enterprises
- Renewing of 76 month-to-month leases to 3-5 year leases in the 12 Proclaimed Fishing Harbours, which will result in security of tenure to business owners, sustaining of jobs, expansion of business opportunities and further investment.

Infrastructure projects have been completed in Lamberts Bay, Gordons Bay and Still Bay (Stilbaai) between 2012 and 2014. The scope of the projects was mainly on repair and maintenance programme of civil works, infrastructure, buildings and electrical installation. The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) has developed a process and road map to undertake the proclamation of small harbours in conjunction with DPW, Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and other government departments. The process is deemed to take between 6 and 12 months to complete. Port Alfred, Cape St Francis, Hondeklipbaai, Port Shepstone, Port Grosvenor and Port Edward harbours are identified as the initial list of small harbours to be proclaimed and to be followed by others on the coastline.

Discussion
The Chairperson indicated that Operation Phakisa is a general government focus but the Committee would like to get more information on what DPW was doing, in terms of programmes in place. The Committee should be given more information on the number of projects and the number of jobs that had been created. The presentation by DPW was essentially generic as it lacked detailed breakdown of information on the projects in terms provinces or regions.

Ms D Kohler-Barnard (DA) wanted to know if DPW was involved in the closure of a well-developed regular passenger liner in Durban as this was regarded as a tourist hub. It would be important to hear if DPW had any joint cooperation with tourism entities in the provinces where small harbours may be seen as a tourism destination. The strategic intent of small harbour entities is to provide safety, security and territorial integrity to the Republic of South Africa, and this integrity needed to be upheld by the South African Police Service (SAPS). The Auditor-General (AGSA) study last year revealed that 96% of human resources for the maritime border contingency of SAPS was under the capacity rate. It must be corrected that it was not the responsibility or mandate of DPW to ensure safety, security and territorial integrity of the country.

Ms S Kopane (ANC) agreed with the Chairperson about the lack of detailed information. The Committee should be provided with more information on the development programmes, especially Operation Phakisa programmes. The focus should be on the targets for employment creation and the number of people that benefited from the empowerment programmes. It would also be important to ascertain whether DPW had signed any Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with other departments to strengthen cooperation.

Ms P Adams (ANC) asked how DPW was intending to enforce public accountability in Operation Phakisa. The Committee should be given a breakdown of the proclaimed and unproclaimed harbours, in terms of provinces, location and the year of proclamation. She asked how far DPW had gone in logging the harbours as immovable assets. It was also unclear when would DPW conclude a policy review of the immovable assets, including the inclusion of small harbours as national assets. How many applications had been received for Operation Phakisa? DPW would need to form partnerships with other government departments in order to accelerate the creation of job opportunities. How many jobs had been created? What was the contribution of Operation Phakisa to the GDP of the country?

Mr F Adams (ANC) mentioned that the ocean economy was a topic that was very close to his heart, especially Operation Phakisa. The establishment of Operation Phakisa was intended to empower small players that are directly benefiting from the ocean. However, it was clear at the current moment that small businesses are struggling to be fully incorporated into Operation Phakisa, especially in the small harbours. Operation Phakisa was originally intended to uplift and empower poor people, who are often found in rural areas, particularly fisherman, boat building and marine transport and manufacturing activities. It is now evident that small players cannot even access our ocean because of gatekeepers at the harbours and this was something that has to be dealt with urgently.

The Chairperson requested Mr Adams to indicate a particular community that was not benefiting from Operation Phakisa or being denied full access to coast and ocean resources.

Mr Adams replied that there are recreational fishermen in harbours like Hout Bay, Granger Bay, Saldanha Bay and Saint Lucia Bay that are being denied access to the harbours. Some fishermen are asked to pay R150 in order to be able to get permits to perform fishing legally. Local people in Hout Bay were still struggling to get access to the leases or even the renewal of the expired leases. The local communities in Hout Bay are also not able to benefit through employment in the ice making facilities, because of the persistent problem of gatekeeping. The fish processing facilities such as fish factories, fish building facilities and other industrial activities should be expanded so that local communities are the ones who benefit. Community empowerment was a great initiative that was able to provide a platform for grass-root inclusion to the ocean economy especially through the focused programmes on youth development, small business and cooperatives. However, this important aspect was once again derailed by gatekeeping that is aimed at pushing small players to the edges.

Mr Adams added that aquaculture in Saldanha Bay was mostly benefiting rich, advanced big companies rather than the local communities. There are also cases in Saldanha Bay where foreign nationals are being employed at the expense of South Africans, and this was another strategy by big businesses for paying smaller wages. The Small Harbours Development Unit held a meeting in Cape Town but it was only big, advanced businesses people that were present at that meeting, instead of local communities. What should be done by DPW to ensure that cooperation between big business and local communities was achieved? DPW should prioritise the empowerment of local communities in the contracts issued for the removal of large vessels in our harbours so as to directly benefit local communities. It was unclear why South Africa had ratified an agreement with China on the small harbour development programme, instead of Malaysia as a leading country in ocean economy.

Ms D Mathebe (ANC) asked if other departments involved in the Operation Phakisa, as the general understanding was that all government departments are part of Operation Phakisa. The Committee should be provided with information on the amount of money that had been allocated to DPW for Operation Phakisa. Which Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) colleges are offering courses on Maritime Intellectual Property? She asked DPW to provide a list of retrenched and unemployed military veterans to benefit from the Phakisa Project on Territorial Integrity.

Ms Kohler-Barnard asked if the retrenched and unemployed military veterans responsible for territorial integrity of our ocean implied that DPW was intending to introduce an alternative security service that would not be under SAPS or the South African National Defence Force (SANDF). It was unclear if these military veterans would be armed and provided with a uniform in order to comply with the Private Security Industry Regulation Act (PSIRA). DPW did not have a mandate to provide security or to provide military intervention. It was concerning that no timeframes had been provided for the commencement and completion of various projects like the Phakisa project responsible for maritime enterprise development and infrastructure.

Mr Govender responded that the management of small harbours has not been up to scratch and Members have already alluded to a number of complaints about that. The matter of the issuing and the renewal of lease agreements in small harbours needed to be deal with adequately. The creation of the Small Harbours Development Unit was to ensure that there is cooperation between government departments. The proclaimed harbours are those that have been proclaimed by DAFF. The unproclaimed harbours are not formally controlled and managed by DPW. DPW together with DAFF was to ensure that the South African coastline was protected and managed for the benefit of all citizens. DPW was the custodian of the physical assets from the land side and it is responsible for the utilisation of those properties. The issuing of fishing licences was within the remit of DAFF and not DPW.

Mr Adams corrected that his question was not based on the issuing of fishing licences but the utilisation of the public property in the harbours like Saldanha Bay and Kalk Bay.

Mr Govender responded that there are a number of businesses that are operating from small to very large harbours. DPW was mandated to regularise the current occupation of the buildings in harbours and this could be done through a lease agreement. The complaint around the conduct of officials in the issuing of lease contracts was noted and DPW will try by all means to do a follow-up on the matter. The Directors General of DPW, DAFF and DEA convened a joint meeting with municipalities and communities that are located in proximity to the country’s harbours. This was meant to engage with the businesses operating in small and big harbours together with municipalities and local communities located close to the harbours. The meeting was essentially about the promotion of cooperation between businesses that are operating in the harbours in terms of adherence to lease renewals. There was also another meeting convened between DEA and the Presidency in terms of Operation Phakisa on 15 October 2015 and all stakeholders involved in the ocean economy were present at the meeting and participated in the review of the progress that had been made and the way forward.

There is a programme in place to review the leases and this was one of the most important steps in addressing the complaints around lease agreements. It was concerning that there were still a total of 87 leases that had not been renewed, and this was despite all the measures taken to engage with local communities. DPW has once again started engagements with various provinces including the Provincial Department of Public Works in Northern Cape. DPW has already started engaging with each of the local municipalities in the Western Cape and this would be followed by the ratification of the MoU. The engagements with the municipalities were to consider the spatial economic framework priorities of the municipalities.

Mr Govender said that it was commonly known that the South African coastline is not properly guided as there are no measures in place to ensure that the coastline is secured against property damage. South Africa was very vulnerable along the coastline and prone to a variety of criminal activities that are taking place in our oceans. Buffalo City in Eastern Cape and the City of Cape Town have already created units that are responsible for the protection of our coastline. DPW was exploring the possibility of creating a Municipal Coast Drive Unit and the redeployment of military veterans is an issue that was being discussed. It was not the intention of DPW to create an impression that there was a plan to introduce an alternative security service that would not be under the SAPS or SANDF. The development of small businesses was the priority of DPW and this was proven by the steps taken to engage with local communities and ensure that the properties in our harbours are properly utilised.

There are some properties in harbours like Saldanha Bay and Hout Bay that are not properly utilised and DPW would engage local municipalities in those areas to ensure that the properties are occupied and functional. The property that is not being utilised in Hout Bay was funded by the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) but it went through some difficulties and was closed down. DPW held a meeting in the first week of January 2016 together with the DG and members of the communities about these kinds of issues. The unoccupied buildings could be used for new ventures so as to be productive and contribute to the development of local communities. DPW would need to ensure that there was a balance between big and small businesses in terms of benefiting tfromocean resources, as big businesses are dependent on small operators to supplement on their work. The Minister has already engaged with the property industry to set out that there should be a policy framework developed for not just harbours but also the property industry on how big businesses would have to adhere to certain targets. DPW wanted to ensure that Black people were able to enter to the maritime industry as it was currently White dominated. This policy framework would assist DPW in accelerating the development of small businesses rather than foreign companies.

Mr Govender agreed that Operation Phakisa is merely a framework that is guided by targets and DPW would need to maximise the entire coastline for the benefit of local communities. There are projects that are underway where DPW was working together with municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and Ports St Johns in the Eastern Cape. DPW considered the transformation of the maritime industry as a significant challenge. There was a need to encourage businesses to invest in the maritime industry so as to accelerate job creation. There is a lot that has been developed in the Northern Cape, KZN and the Eastern Cape in the maritime and aquaculture industry.

Ms Kohler-Barnard asked if the granting of the leases had been changed to operate on a monthly basis since 2005. The change in the granting of leases to monthly basis was leading to instances where the lessees are being arrested because they had not made a monthly payment.

Mr Govender replied that the intention of DPW was actually to avoid the granting of leases on a monthly basis. The intention of DPW was to bring about stability and sustainability in the businesses and have proper leases in place. DPW had received 107 lease applications and the vast majority of those leases have been processed. The main concern was about businesses that have not even made application for the renewal of the lease agreement, as these are businesses that would then find it difficult to operate in the harbours.

The Chairperson requested DPW to clarify on the lease agreement that would have the duration of 99 years, especially in terms of the number of those leases and their current status.

Mr Adams pointed out that one of the reasons for failure to renew the leases was the money that had to be paid by poor communities in order to be granted leases. The big companies granted 99 year leases are often pushing the smaller players in the industry to the edges, making it impossible for poor communities to occupy the buildings around the harbours. DPW needed to ensure that any business that was being done was intended to uplift and empower poor communities instead of rich, advanced businesses.

Mr Govender replied that DPW would have discussions in place during the processing of the applications for leases, and this was to review the 99 years leases and how they impact on small players. The good news is that the vast majority of leases at the moment are not 99 year leases and the main focus is on short-term leases. DPW was trying to provide leases that would be appropriate for the operation of both small and big businesses. DPW was in engagement with Oceana on their leases and this engagement was intended to prevent the closure of the factories and job losses.

Ms Sue Mosegomi, Chief Director: Small Harbour Development Unit: PMTE, DPW, responded that DPW has finalised the appointment of the consultant to deal with the challenge of infrastructure and the claiming of property in harbours for the next three years. DPW has a strong relationship with the City of Cape Town and this was why the focus on the development and capital investment on harbours would be in Hout Bay, Kalk Bay and Gordons Bay. DPW has located seven main types of projects under Spatial and Economic Development that have been identified as critically important to all these harbours. The plan was to expand this initiative to all the other harbours throughout the country and not just in the City of Cape Town.

Mr Govender responded that the agreement with China was within the framework of a country-to-country cooperation agreement and this was mainly inclusively to China. DPW was also interacting with other countries like Malaysia on the leases that could be granted. Malaysia has not been doing any comprehensive work on the development of small harbours and DPW would like to benefit from their experience. There are also other African countries like Namibia where South Africa would like to learn from their experience and projects that are currently being developed to promote development of small harbours. DPW always interacts with local people on whatever work that is being done to municipalities and this was one of the premises of public participation and accountability. DPW was participating in the Ocean Economy Operation Phakisa Task Team of government that is led by DEA and the participation of DPW is mainly on the provision of the accommodation needs in small harbours. The Committee would be provided with detailed information at the next meeting on the number of Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs) that have been empowered and the jobs that have been created in the process.

Green Building Framework by Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE)
Mr Paul Serote, Head of PMTE, indicated that the Minister of Public Works launched DPW’s Green Building Framework in December 2011 during COP17. The chief aim of positioning DPW as a central authority on Green Building, particularly in its property portfolio, was the fact that South Africa is a co-signatory to international agreements which embrace sustainable human settlements. In response to the objectives of the Green Building Framework and Policy, a Sector Plan has been developed by all provinces and DPW regions. DPW participates with other departments in the development of strategies to meet national requirements and these included Department of Energy (DoE) in the National Energy Efficiency Strategy Post 2015 and Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for the Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions implementation after COP 21. The focus is on the enhancement of human settlements and social cohesion and there has been an identification of targets on Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS). In response to the objectives of the Green Building Framework and Policy, PMTE was working on the integration into immovable asset formation through working with the Asset Management Unit, Construction, Supply Chain Management (SCM) and Precinct Unit. The identification of opportunities and threats to Green Building and participation and involvement in the planning phases as identified above.

The policy has been developed to include all organs of state in the development of the following:
- Refinement of policies, programmes and action plans done through the Sector Plan;
- Development of National Green Building Indicators in the Sector Plan
- National Green Building Standards and Guidelines – development underway
- Green Building skills development and training programmes in all regions and recently included provinces
- Research and development of capacity from the Department of Science and Technology (DST), DoE Energy Training, Service Providers (Water Efficiency)

Ms Pinkie Modisane, Chief Director: Facilities and Property Management, stated that a total of R32.5 million has been allocated to the measurement and verification of energy efficiency programmes. The amount has not been spent because there was still a procurement process underway and the remote monitoring solution was still in development. A total of R5.2 million has been spent on capacity building and training. A total of R50 million was allocated for Green Building Operations (waste management, recycling, alternative sources of water and IKS). The sector plan core focus areas of PMTE were mainly on energy management, renewable energy, water and waste management and IKS management. DPW shared energy and water savings contracts in all regions and a number of technology retrofits have been effected through the contracts, with energy and water consumption savings achieved. A Service Level Agreement (SLA) for Energy Efficiency was already signed with DPW and the SLA for water efficiency was under review by legal services. The monitoring and verification (M&V) of reported savings and project implementation will be undertaken.
 

The Smart Meter installation was currently a pilot project and DPW was not responsible for the procurement of services and equipment. In regard to the current financing and procurement plan, DPW has applied for a NAMA facility in collaboration with DoE and DEA to fund some of the projects. There was still a consideration of the contracting model for Power Purchase Agreements (Private Investments in Photovoltaic) and PPPs and DPW will continue to top slice the Facilities Management Budget. PMTE was still in the process of completing the following priorities:
- Reviewing the Draft Green Building Policy; finalisation of the Draft Sector Plan as per MinMec Directive
- Progress Reporting to MinMec on the Sector Plan Indicators for 2015/16
- Planning for Information campaigns
- Commissioning of Measurement and Verification
- Finalisation of Procurement Processes
- Delivery on Annual Performance Plan (APP) Commitments.

Discussion
Ms E Masehela (ANC) asked if it was not possible for the smart meters to be manufactured locally than being outsourced in other countries. It was concerning that PMTE had not spent the allocated budget for the measurement and verification of energy and water efficiency programmes and Green Building Operations, as the current financial year was in its last quarter. It was unclear if PMTE would be able to spend the entire allocated budget within the short space of time before the end of the current financial year.

Ms Kopane asked for more information on the contribution of other government departments in the projects undertaken by PMTE. The presentation failed to highlight any challenges that are experienced by the entity and the measures in place to deal with those challenges.

Ms Modisane responded that other government departments are not contributing to the budget of the Department on the projects that are being undertaken. However, DoE has given DPW funding for the training of officials on a number of projects like energy management.

Ms Kohler-Barnard asked if it was possible for the Committee to be provided with the two research papers that had been commissioned by DPW and developed by CSIR.

Ms Modisane promised that the Committee would be provided with the research papers commissioned by DPW and developed by CSIR. DPW was still working with the CSIR on the international review on sustainable building.

Mr Adams asked about the number of government buildings that had already embraced the Green Building Programme. It would be important to know how far PMTE or DPW was on the installation of smart light switches that automatically switch on and switch off when there is no one present in the building.

Ms Modisane replied that there are smart meters that have been manufactured in South Africa and the ones that are being used from other countries were merely for piloting purpose. There are now local contractors that are busy with the installation of smart meters. It was likely that some of the budget allocated to DPW would not be used in its entirety, and DPW was currently in engagement on the reprioritisation of the budget. The Committee would be provided with information on the number of government buildings that had embraced the Green Building Programme.

Mr Serote added that there are indeed contractors that are manufacturing smart meters in the country and most municipalities in the country are going through the process of the installation of smart meters. There is a lot of potential for smart meters to be manufactured in South Africa and DPW would ensure that this programme was able to empower local contractors. On the challenges experienced, the migration to Green Building Programme was complex and it would take a while for other areas to be fully integrated into the programme. The delays in the spending on the allocated budget are caused by other delays in the procurement process. The reality was that DPW would not be able to spend the entire allocated budget but this did not mean there was no work that had already been done. There was a lot of development that has been done with respect to the remote monitoring solution and maintenance in the built environment. DPW was already working with DoE in an attempt to utilise their service providers in Monitoring and Verification. The challenge of capacity was making it difficult to be able implement the ambitious targets and goals that are in place. PMTE was in a process of finalising the acquisition of critical skills from the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) to ensure that the entity was able to achieve the targets.

Ms Adams asked DPW to elaborate on the IKS as it sounded like an interesting initiative that should be supported throughout government departments. It would be important to know if it was possible to measure the impact and success of capacity building and training.

Ms Modisane responded that IKS was focused on building traditional buildings like garden roof-tops and rain water harvesting. The climate has been changing and people need to find innovative ways to be able adapt to these changing conditions. The IKS was basically about integrating indigenous knowledge into what was being utilised at the moment.

Ms Kopane asked a follow-up question on the current challenges experienced by DPW, as this question had not been answered. It was also not articulated whether there was still committed from government departments that had signed MoUs with DPW.

Ms Modisane replied that DPW was still in contact with other government departments that had signed MoUs. It was important for DPW to collaborate with other departments so as to bring together all the knowledge and expertise on a variety of sectors like water, energy and environment.

Mr Serote replied that the impact of capacity building becomes apparent in the ability to enhance the artisan skills in this particular area (smart meters installation). The construction of smart meters has attracted a lot of interest from the youth. However, DPW felt that the programme needed to be better structured and coordinated.

Ms Masehela asked if it would be possible for the money not be used in the current financial year to be rolled over to the next financial year.

The Chairperson responded that National Treasury has assured all government departments and their entities that any money not used should be returned to the Treasury.

Mr Serote added that DPW was currently reprioritising some of the programmes as a way of not losing the allocated funds.

The meeting was adjourned.