Employment & Labour Portfolio Audit Outcomes; DEL & NEDLAC 2020/21 Annual Report; with Minister and Deputy Minister

This premium content has been made freely available

Employment and Labour

17 November 2021
Chairperson: Ms M Dunjwa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Annual Reports 2020/21

The Portfolio Committee met in a virtual sitting to be briefed by the Office of the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) on the audit outcomes of the Department of Employment and Labour (DEL) and its entities. It also received presentations on the 2020/21 annual reports of the DEL, the Supported Employment Enterprises (SEE) and the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac).

The ASGA report revealed that the audits had remained stagnant, with most receiving unqualified opinions with findings. The audits for the Compensation Fund (CF) and Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) remained outstanding. The Supported Employment Enterprises (SEE) had obtained a qualified opinion, with findings on compliance -- similar to the previous years.

The DEL, SEE and Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) had submitted financial statements that contained material misstatements, which was not the case with Nedlac. Furthermore, the SEE did not ensure adequate compliance with the accounting framework when reporting its financial information. The DEL's material uncorrected misstatements in its annual performance report were due to invalid achievements being reported. The CCMA had corrected all material misstatements identified during the audit.

In the current year, there had been a stagnation in compliance with legislation, as all four auditees had received an unqualified opinion with findings. They had not implemented effective action plans to address significant internal control deficiencies relating to compliance with legislation. The DEL had consequence management processes in place, but AGSA could not confirm whether disciplinary steps were actually taken due to a lack of proper record keeping. There was an overall stagnation in supply chain management (SCM) compliance, and most findings related to uncompetitive or unfair procurement processes being followed. AGSA also reported that the entities had not implemented adequate review and monitoring controls in the preparation of their financial statements and performance reports. The entities were not effective in developing and monitoring the implementation of action plans, and had not put in place adequate controls to prevent non-compliance with procurement legislation.

The DEL had achieved an overall performance level of 66%. Its unqualified audit report indicated that the matters of emphasis were on a large number of information communication technology (ICT) and SCM findings, and an increase in irregular expenditure. The CCMA had received an unqualified opinion and achieved a performance of 84%, despite the lockdown and budget cuts.

The SEE did not achieve its set targets for the year under review, and had received a qualified audit opinion. Nedlac had received an unqualified audit with findings, most of which were related to irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure. No findings were received in respect of performance information, and remedial action had been taken.

Members were concerned with the overall performance of the Department and its entities, particularly the recurrence and repeats in the audit findings. They were also not happy with the outstanding audits for the Compensation Fund and Unemployment Insurance Fund. The lack of evidence of consequence management within the Department and the entities was a source of concern. A Member sought clarity on the extent of AGSA's powers to deal with the specific recommendations on repeated findings, and there was general disappointment at the overall stagnation in SCM compliance in following procurement processes.

Meeting report

Minister's overview

Mr Thulas Nxesi, Minister of Employment and Labour, said the reports to be presented were indicative of the COVID-19 pandemic and the labour market. It showed how the Department was tested, and its responsiveness, resilience and weaknesses. There was serious commitment, and this was evident at the strategic sessions and the fact that the findings of the Auditor General of South Africa (AGSA) had been addressed. The lekgotla included detailed action plans and key commitments from each entity.

The Department of Employment and Labour (DEL) had achieved an overall performance of 66%, which was a decrease of 13% compared to the previous year. The main focus was on overall governance and the findings by the AGSA. Action plans had been developed in consultation with the office of the AG, together with reporting frameworks, monitoring and implementation, to quality assure all transactions. The Department received an unqualified opinion. Major findings were on information communication technology (ICT), cyber security and supply chain management (SCM) prescripts. These outcomes had been addressed at the strategic session.

There was an increase in the irregular expenditure and a decrease in the overall performance compared to the previous years. This was due to the lockdown restrictions. The Supported Employment Enterprises (SEE) under-performed and received a qualified audit opinion. The areas of repeat findings resulted in a qualified opinion. The findings were related to inventory, cost of sales, assets and services in kind. There were areas that showed improvement from the 2019/20 annual financial statements, which were the cash flow statement and performance information.

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) achieved a performance of 84%, despite the lockdown and budget cuts. What stood out was the job saving initiatives and efforts. The CCMA received an unqualified opinion, and the findings were being addressed. The National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) also received an unqualified opinion.

AGSA on DEL portfolio outcomes

Ms Kgabo Komape, Business Executive, AGSA, said the presentation covered all the audits of the entities that had been finalised, with the exception of the Unemployment Fund (UIF) and the Compensation Fund (CF), which was due to the late submission of financial statements. Their audits were still being conducted. The audit of the CF was at an advanced stage, but a lot of work still needed to be done on the UIF.

The office of the AG was not able to express an opinion on the predetermined objectives of the Department previously. This year, it was able to express an opinion because the documents were submitted by the Department. The DEL was on the right track regarding building on performance information. The financial statements of Nedlac did not contain any errors, and AGSA was encouraged by that. There was still a lot of work to be done when it came to the Department, and in particular the Supported Employment Enterprises (SEE). It was important to implement the recommendations as contained in the report.

Ms Michelle Magerman, Deputy Business Executive, AGSA, said the audit outcome report revealed that the audits remained stagnant, with most audits receiving unqualified audit opinions with findings. The audits for the CF and UIF remained outstanding. The SEE obtained a qualified opinion with findings on compliance, similar to the previous years.

Nedlac submitted financial statements that did not contain material misstatements. The DEL, SEE and CCMA submitted financial statements that contained material misstatements. Furthermore, the SEE did not ensure adequate compliance with the accounting framework when reporting financial information.

The DEL had material uncorrected misstatements in the annual performance report (APR) due to invalid achievements being reported. The CCMA had corrected all material misstatements identified during the audit, consequently no material findings were reported in the audit report.

The CCMA’s commitment register was inaccurate, and in the DEL various errors were identified mainly on intangible assets, capital commitments, key management disclosures and operating lease commitments. The findings raised at the SEE were recurring in the areas of cost of sales, assets and services in kind.

In terms of credible performance reporting, the SEE and Nedlac submitted performance reports without errors. There were material findings identified in the performance reports of the CCMA and DEL. The CCMA corrected the misstatements and the DEL remained with uncorrected misstatements. Management should enhance the review controls to ensure that misstatements were prevented, or detected and corrected. Management should ensure effective performance management processes that ensure all role players implement duties adequately.

In the current year there had been a stagnation in compliance with legislation, as all four auditees received an unqualified opinion with findings. The auditees did not implement effective action plans to address significant internal control deficiencies relating to compliance with legislation. The matters relating to compliance were expenditure management, consequence management and procurement and contract management.

Irregular expenditure was incurred by the Department and entities in the portfolio. The highest contributors to irregular expenditure related to adherence to SCM prescripts and the effective monitoring thereof. Fruitless and wasteful expenditure was also incurred by the Department and the entities in the portfolio. R 7 million was incurred by the Department in the de-scoping of information technology (IT) related projects for the SEE, and R 9 million in fruitless and wasteful expenditure was incurred by the SEE related to the loss of assets and inventory written off.

The DEL had consequence management processes in place, but AGSA could not confirm whether disciplinary steps were taken due to the lack of proper record keeping. Accounting officers must ensure that complete and proper records must be kept supporting the investigations that have been conducted and disciplinary steps taken. There was an overall stagnation in SCM compliance, and most findings were related to uncompetitive or unfair procurement processes being followed. The DEL and Nedlac did not obtain three written quotations as part of the procurement process. The bid documentation for the SEE did not stipulate the minimum threshold.

There was an overall stagnation in SCM compliance, and most findings were related to uncompetitive or unfair procurement processes followed.

Ms Magerman also reported on assurance provided per entity, the status of internal controls per entity, and the status of the IT environment. AGSA reported that the entities did not implement adequate review and monitoring controls in preparation of their annual financial statements (AFS) and performance reports. The entities were not effective in developing and monitoring the implementation of action plans. The entities did not put in place adequate controls to prevent non-compliance with procurement legislation.

(See attached presentation for details)

Discussion

The Chairperson thanked the AGSA team, and sought clarity on the location of assets of the SEE and the response that had been given, as the SEE was being monitored by the Department. It was a major concern to understand that the Department and Nedlac had not followed the SCM prescripts in procurement processes. The DG of the Department could not be everywhere, and it was the responsibility of other senior managers to play their role.

Mr S Mdabe (ANC) sought clarity on the late submission of the AFS, and asked if letters had been sent to management.

Ms H Denner (FF+) asked if there were performance management processes in place, if not why. She sought clarity on why disciplinary steps could not be detected. She further enquired if consequence management had been put in place with the loss of assets, and who was in charge of the assets and asset register.

Ms A Zuma (ANC) wanted to know what the Department's strategy was regarding entities that were not performing, and what exactly had transpired in the tender processes at Nedlac.

Mr M Bagraim (DA) said that it appeared that consequence management was not implemented by the AGSA. What was the AG doing to ensure there was consequence management in light of the amended legislation? It was a concern that money was spent but entities were not performing and needed the AG to take action.

Dr M Cardo (DA) referred to the audits of the CF and UIF not being finalised. When would they be finalised?

Ms C Mkhonto (EFF) said the Department had bought gadgets for remote working purposes. Did the report of the AG consider the procurement of the gadgets in relation to the work done? The reports indicated under-performance due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but money had been spent on devices to ensure that work was performed. Targets were not met, with recurring findings at the SEE, and this was a major concern. Were the staff competent and appointed with the right skills to perform these duties? She sought clarity on the loss of assets, the worth of the assets, and if the SEE had been able to function during the lockdown.

Mr M Nontsele (ANC) said the recurring nature of findings at the SEE was a great concern. He wanted to know when the outstanding audits for the CF and UIF would be finalised. He sought clarity on the extent of the powers of the AG, and if there were specific recommendations on repeat findings. He expressed appreciation for the significant progress made, but said serious action needed to be taken in certain areas.

The Chairperson asked if physical audits were conducted in the provinces, or if the AG was dependent on the information from the head office. She requested for an explanation of how audits were conducted.

AGSA's responses

Ms Komape said the presentation had highlighted the phasing-in approach to the amended Public Audit Act (PAA). The phase -n meant the AG had to take the public sector in tranches. The key element was that it leveraged on the mechanisms that did work with the public service. By the time the PAA was activated, there was a responsibility on the accounting officer (AO) to investigate irregular expenditure. The role of accounting officers was clear in terms of Section 38. The PAA did not take powers from role players within the public sector, but built on those pillars. The AG was assisting entities to resolve irregularities and relied on the Committee to monitor the entities and the Department for the enforcement of accountability.

The annual report of the CF would be ready by 30 November, while the UIF had submitted late on 30 September. The UIF was still in the execution phase, and management reports had not been sent. The target date to finalise this was 15 December.

Ms Magerman indicated that the SEE had obtained a service provider for the delivery of assets, but there was no evidence that the delivery had taken place. More controls should be exercised. Fruitless and wasteful expenditure had been disclosed, but the SEE had to identify who was responsible and take the necessary action.

Nedlac had incurred irregular expenditure -- this had been disclosed -- and they were taking action. Nedlac needed to ensure that preventive controls were in place.

There was a performance management system in place at the Department. It needed to be aligned to ensure senior management addressed findings and reported accurately.

The DEL had material misstatements in its annual performance report. It was important for senior managers to execute the duties in their roles and ensure in-year monitoring took place. This would ensure proper reporting and that the AFS were complete.

Laptops had been bought, but it was not identified in reports that staff were unable to perform working duties, although certain projects were implicated. The capturing of performance information at the Department was not configured well at the DEL. The system should be open to all provinces. COVID-19 had placed restrictions on some physical audits, but other processes and procedures had been introduced. The office of AGSA did conduct physical audits. There was a consequence management unit that dealt with the investigations. It was the duty of the employee relations unit to finalise the process and for action to be taken.

Ms Komape indicated that the office of the AG conducted physical audits and went to the provinces. AGSA prepared requests for the head office to ensure the coordination of the outcomes. Head office had consolidated the information this year for the Department.

The Nedlac tender process had not been in line with SCM prescripts.

The Chairperson thanked the AGSA team, and highlighted the importance of governance, the Committee, adherence to the law, and consequence management. The outstanding audits for the CF and UIF were a major concern.

DEL's audited 2020/21annual performance report

Mr Thobile Lamati, Director-General (DG), DEL, gave an overview on the year under review and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ms Marsha Bronkhorst, Chief Operations Officer (COO), gave a comparative analysis per programme in the Department, and by province, and reported on areas of non-achievement. The Department had achieved an overall performance of 66%. The main reasons for under-performance were the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown restrictions. She further provided information on consequence management taken per salary level in the Department, with a breakdown of misconduct cases.

The DEL had received an unqualified audit report. The matters of emphasis were on a large number of information communication technology (ICT) findings, supply chain management (SCM) findings, and an increase in irregular expenditure. Audit action plans were compiled and were currently being audited for effectiveness. Monthly and quarterly monitoring and progress reporting was occurring at the executive and Departmental executive management committees. A governance lekgotla had been convened with all oversight structures to address matters on clean governance. The oversight structures report to the accounting officer (AO) on a quarterly basis on the implementation of recommendations.

Mr Bheki Maduna, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), said the unqualified audit report for the 2020/21 financial year was due to a restatement of the corresponding figures in note 33 to the AFS, due to errors in the previous years. The Department had under-spent the budget for Programme 2. He further reported on the expenditure information and provided reasons for the deviations within the divisions.

Mr Lamati said the performance information had received a qualified opinion. All provinces were utilizing inspection equipment services. The issue of reliability of information was in the past, as information would not be accepted that was not captured on the system. There had been delays with the IT licensing processes due to COVID-19. The service provider who rolled out SAP licenses had missed crucial deadlines in terms of the service level agreement. The service provider had been held to account and the project was back on track. Currently there was a dashboard view on the progress. No costs had been detected due to the previous delays. Steps had been taken to improve on governance. The structures submitted reports quarterly to the AO on the implementation of recommendations, oversight and internal controls.

(See attached presentation for details)

Supported Employment Enterprises (SEE) audited 2020/21annual performance report

Mr Sibusiso Phakathi, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), SEE, said they were mindful of the challenges and the task at hand. The SEE‘s strategic imperative was to provide work opportunities for people with disabilities. In the recovery from the pandemic there had not been a lot of activity. As a result, in quarters 1 and 2 there was not much productivity. In quarter 3, the SEE achieved its set targets by 100% in providing work opportunities for people with disabilities. He elaborated on the targets not achieved due to a decline in revenue. The other departments had not spent as much money as projected.

The SEE did not achieve its set targets for the year under review and received a qualified audit opinion for the 2020/21 AFS. The repeat findings were the basis for the qualified opinion, and were related to inventory, cost of sales, assets, and services in kind.

Ms Malebo Sebaka, CFO, said the SEE had received a qualified opinion with areas of repeat findings. The loss of assets had been due to the facilities in which the SEE operated. There were 30 factories across the country, and some located in industrial areas were exposed to theft and losses. The asset verification and review indicated that a number of assets were lost or were at risk. Security had been deployed to the factories. The lost assets had been reported under fruitless and wasteful expenditure, and the entity would continue with its investigation process.

There had been an improvement in compliance findings within the SEE. During the audit process, and in consultation with the AG, the SEE had explained that it did source locally. The only deficiency identified was the fact that its adverts did not indicate goods were locally produced. However, when the evaluation was concluded, the service providers were assessed in terms of the provision of locally produced raw material. There had been discussions with the AG on this finding, which was that the final products produced in the factories were local. The finding related to sub-contracts was also discussed with the AG. The last finding, under compliance, was the evaluation system that was utilized. The SEE indicated to the AG that an incorrect evaluation system had been used, and this was addressed within the compliance processes. The collection of debt posed a challenge for the SEE, with underlying system problems. The SEE had embarked on a process to enhance the system to correct deficiencies.

The budget of the SEE was comprised of a grant from the National Treasury and additional income generated from sale of goods manufactured across all its factories. The grant did not cover all the salary costs. The entity had been bailed out by R25m for the payment of salaries, and R17.5m for the enhancement of the ICT infrastructure. The SEE had high expenditure costs due to high manufacturing costs, but the salary expenditure had been less than budgeted. The variances were due to fewer sales during Covid-19, with minimal orders and minimal interest received due to less cash reserves in the bank.

Mr Lamati said qualified staff were being appointed. The SEE had embarked on a process to focus on cost accounting competence within the entity.

(See attached presentation for details)

Discussion                                                                                             

Mr Bagraim referred to the entity's consequence management, and said the Committee must look at the results of the transgressions, the actions taken, and who was suspended. This was not indicated in the reports.

Ms Mkhonto said it was important to start with the recommendations made by the AG. The recommendations needed consistent monitoring and remedial action.

The performance in the provinces was not satisfactory. The slide on the misconduct indicated only the internal matters of the Department. What about the external matters, as services to clients had been reported on, where officials were not attending to clients or giving incorrect advice. These external matters needed to be reported on and attended to by the Committee. It needed to visit those offices where these transgressions took place. She sought clarity on the plan for the SEE to provide essential services. She also wanted to know when the strategic plan had been reviewed to be in line with the COVID-19 regulations. Reviewing the plans was important to ensure that the Department performed.

The Chairperson wanted an update on the status of the IT environment. How would the witnesses be corrected, and which entities were implicated in the user account management? It was concerning to see the AG reporting that the Department did not follow SCM regulations when obtaining quotations. However, they must give credit where it was due. She requested an indication of when the sexual harassment policy would be finalised.

The SEE was not performing well. There had been two new appointments, and they were competent and skilled. Their performance would be judged on the work that was done.

 

DEL's response

Mr Lamati said he found it difficult to address the comment made by Mr Bagraim, who had stated that the Department should make the performance more believable. The report presented had been audited on the basis of the performance of the Department.

The Department welcomed the scrutiny on consequence management and sanctions issued. The external misconduct and transgressions had to be investigated, such as clients sleeping on the premises because the offices closed at 15:00. These situations would be investigated, because the Department did not operate on set targets of how many clients must be serviced per day. There was no set target that the offices would service only 30 people per day. All services must be provided accordingly. When people encountered this kind of poor service, they should not hesitate to contact the offices.

The Department had always been positioning the SEE to provide essential services. It was assisting hospitals and the Department of Basic Education. It had plans and always appealed and needed support from the Committee to ensure that the structures were provided with opportunities.

The Department had developed a work from home policy that was shared with staff to ensure sound monitoring.

The user account management was a human resources (HR) and corporate services matter. When HR effected terminations, it did not affect the IT system. The emails from the people who were leaving were now removed from the system. When an employee left the Department there was no interface between the system from HR and IT. This was being attended to.

The Department and the SEE indicated the reasons for under-performance. There was consistent monitoring and consequence management in the provinces. Provinces operated differently, and the targets set were based on the available resources. Steps were taken to ensure that all provinces performed to the set standard. The COO issued letters to all provinces that under-performed to ensure consequence management. The sexual harassment policy would be finalised by 31 March 2022.

Mr Maduna said that three written quotations were requested during the procurement process. However, there were instances when three quotations could not be obtained. Unfortunately, there were people who at times did not follow what was prescribed. This was a case of putting people through the necessary processes to remind them of what was expected. This was a human error that needed correction.

The Chairperson said the topics discussed touched on the integrity of the leadership, the Department and the Committee. The remark by Mr Bagraim was not appreciated. The Committee would not sugar-coat the discussions, but it was the manner and approach as to how it was done. The Committee would keep the Department accountable, and she appealed to Members to be mindful of this.

Nedlac's audited 2020/21annual performance report

Ms Lisa Seftel, Executive Director (ED), Nedlac, said 2020/21 had been an unprecedented year for Nedlac, as it was for the country. Its role had shifted drastically to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent need to recover and reconstruct the economy. The annual report reflected the progress in areas as well as the ongoing work in promoting social dialogue and its inputs into policy and legislation.

She reported on the achievements per programme, the response to COVID-19 and the strategic planning and restructuring. She also elaborated on the economic recoveries, the presidential job summit and the various social dialogues.

There had been engagement with the retail sector to ensure improved safety for workers and customers. There had been negotiations over a liquor social compact to balance the negative health impact of alcohol use against the job and income losses through the restrictions on the sale of alcohol.

There were also engagements on the opening up of local and international travel to support a tourism recovery. Attempts to secure a safe travel direction, including promoting “peak” spreading, were not successful.

The Labour Relations Act (LRA) Section 77 processes had concluded applications on the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) economic crisis and public transport challenges which were filed by COSATU, the Federation of Unions of South Africa (Fedusa) and the National Council of Trade Unions (Nactu) on 7 October last year. Applications in progress were the violent crimes in the Western Cape; and the South African Federation of Trade Unions (SAFTU): Defence and promotion of socio-economic interests of workers and the working class in general.

Nedlac had initiated the governance structure in the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) to promote and enable local production of personal protective equipment (PPE). There was a challenge to ensure that government entities were compelled to procure from local producers.

On economic recovery, the President had called a Forum for Economic Recovery on 13 August 2020, where all social partners presented their plans, and it was agreed that senior leadership would draw up a set of priority actions for economic reconstruction and the institutional arrangements to support these actions. On 15 September, a Social Partner’s Economic Recovery Action Plan (ERRP) was presented to the President, which set out collective and individual commitments in a focused number of areas. On 15 October, the President announced at a joint sitting of Parliament the government’s economic recovery and reconstruction strategy which incorporated the social partner’s plan. Nedlac subsequently set up processes and structures to track the implementation of commitments and collaborate in identified areas. The Presidential Job Summit commitments were integrated into the ERRP commitments. The economic recovery leadership team deals with escalations and work streams to focus on identified areas. The process committee manages the tracking of implementation and areas of collaboration

The annual report includes an annexure recording the work done on implementing the job summit commitments. She presented the completed reports on policy and legislation and work in progress.

Nedlac had received an unqualified audit with findings. The key findings related to irregular expenditure of R3.7 million in 2020/21, and fruitless and wasteful expenditure of late payments to the South African Revenue Service (SARS). No findings were received in respect of performance information, and remedial action had been taken.

Discussion

Dr Cardo asked about the task team that was set up in 2017, and if the restructuring process was related to the work emanating from that task team. Were there other recommendations due to the restructuring process? The expenditure of Nedlac on jobs and salaries was 50% of the revenue -- had this been reevaluated? He requested an indication of what was being done to tackle the situation, and why there were two separate units for economic development. He sought clarity on the engagements on income grants.

Ms Mkhonto spoke about the economic recovery plan, job losses, sales of alcohol and why restrictions were also not put on cigarettes. She asked if there were identified shortcomings in the restructuring process and what Nedlac aimed to achieve at the end of the day.

Mr Mdabe wanted to know if the status of internal controls, proper record keeping, and the review and monitoring and compliance findings, had been addressed.

Mr Nontsele congratulated Nedlac on the work done and the work in progress. He sought clarity on the recovery plan and the restructuring.

Nedlac's response

Ms Seftel said the restructuring was part of the revised strategic plan with social partners due to the economic crisis. There had been engagements and discussions, with progress reports available. There had been a re-evaluation of jobs. The salary budget was 50% of the overall budget. The salaries made up a huge percentage of expenditure due to the introduction of benefits. Operating costs had decreased drastically as engagements and operations were online and virtual.

The economic unit and development unit were not together. There was a lot of work going into the economic side, so to distribute labour evenly it was decided to keep the units separate. There were a number of overlaps from both units, but there were synergies with skills development. The issues involved development and the labour market.

Nedlac was involved with the review on the basic income grant, and had concluded a report on comprehensive social security. There was a commitment from the social partners to continue with engagements on the policies. There were negotiations for a liquor social compact to balance the negative health impact of alcohol use and job and income losses through restrictions on the sale of alcohol. Some parts of the liquor industry had opted for litigation, while others had decided to come and engage with Nedlac. The cigarette industry had gone to court, and there was litigation.

The annual report included an annexure recording the work done in implementing the job summit commitments. Nedlac was committed to be more effective and more professional, with good governance and proper corporate services and digitalisation support.

The internal controls, record keeping, review and monitoring and compliance findings had been addressed, and this was reflected in the annual report and financial statements. The findings by the AG had been addressed by the restructuring and appointment of new CFOs. There was a new basis, and the matters had been monitored by the risk committee and internal auditors. Recommendations had been implemented, and Nedlac was busy with a disciplined audit, implementing management comments.

Concluding remarks

The Chairperson thanked the Department and the entities for the presentations, and reminded Members of the second leg of the sitting.

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.

Share this page: