Status of South Africa's compliance with World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA); DSAC 2023/2024 Q1 performance, DSAC audit outcomes; With Minister

Meeting report

Opening Remarks
The Chairperson said that the Committee’s meeting was taking place against the backdrop of the simmering conflict between Palestine and Israel. South Africa had experienced the impact of oppression and did not wish war in any nation and called for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. She said she had invited Dr Herman Tembe of the Office of Institutions Supporting Democracy within the Speaker’s Office to provide advice on the process to be followed regarding a letter from the Minister.

Briefing by the Minister on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)
Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture, Mr Zizi Kodwa, indicated the steps and actions taken by the Department since WADA had announced that the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) Declaration was non-compliant. He said that South Africa’s commitment to anti-doping was unquestionable. It was a leading anti-doping country in the continent and had adopted anti-doping legislation before WADA introduced a new code. From time to time, WADA audited compliance and its compliance review committee found that several parts of the SAIDS Act, mainly definitions, were non-compliant. WADA’s new code introduced new definitions of the law after the SAIDS Act was passed, therefore there was a need to do amendments to those definitions. The current draft bill was submitted to WADA, which has since accepted the draft bill with amendments. This draft was submitted to Cabinet where it was approved and was presently with the Office Of The State Law Advisor to see if the legislation conflicted with the Constitution. South Africa had 21 days to file a dispute with WADA and it would be doing so that same morning. It felt that there were a number of inconsistencies in the WADA declaration and that the classification of the legislation as being non-compliant was incorrect. The filing of the appeal would also serve to suspend the consequences of WADA’s decision. He was in correspondence with President Banka of WADA to meet with him and explain South Africa’s unquestionable commitment to anti-doping. He had no doubt that the two South African teams currently in action at the Rugby and Cricket World Cups would not be affected. He added that law-making processes in the country could not be done quickly.

Discussion
Mr D Joseph (DA) said he had raised this issue in February 2022. He wanted to know the date Cabinet approved the legislation and if there was a date to meet with President Banka or WADA. Did WADA have to respond officially to ensure South Africa was legally covered? What did the Minister mean by public participation?

Mr B Mamabolo (ANC) said he appreciated the work of the Minister and that the South Africa rugby and cricket teams would play with their flags hoisted.

Mr T Mhlongo (DA) said the issue was of national importance. He asked for details on the context of the appeal. Was there a backup plan if WADA did not consider the appeal? When would the Committee get the outcome of the appeal? He said the issue had started in 2021 and there was incompetency as it was now 2023. He said he supported the appeal.

Minister Kodwa said there was no reason to panic and that national teams would be able to fly the South African flag. He said he would announce shortly a process to investigate what had happened and how South Africa got to this point. WADA wanted the amendments done by January but this may not be possible as the appeal takes into account material conditions and law-making processes.

The Minister then left the meeting.

Department of Sport, Arts and Culture (DSAC) 2023/2024 First Quarter Performance Report
Dr Cynthia Stella Khumalo, Acting Director-General (DG), said that the Department planned to implement and achieve nineteen performance targets. One target in Programme 1 was not achieved resulting in a 95% performance. The target not reached was on the number of ministerial imbizos that should have been held, and this was because of the transition and handover period. All other programmes and core business units had achieved 100%.

Mr Israel Mokgwamme, CFO, presented the financial performance report. The overall spending of the Department was R1.4bn, which was 22.5% of the R6,4bn appropriation. The targeted spend was R1.7bn resulting in underspending of R228m (3,6%). Underspending occurred in Compensation of Employees and in Goods and Services where supply chain management (SCM) delays were experienced in the appointment of a service provider to develop a website, and an intranet tender. There was also under-expenditure because transfers to North-West University and the University of Free State for the implementation of the Human Language Technology project could not be made as planned due to the late submission of Audited Financial Statements by the universities, and also because there were lower than anticipated claims received from athletes for the ministerial sport bursaries programme, and because of the late submission of compliance documents from universities for the implementation of heritage bursaries. There was also under-expenditure to non-profit organisations (NPOs) because the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) needed to finalise a Memorandum of Agreement and the Department was awaiting annual financial statements from the Sports Trust.

(see presentation attached for further details)

Discussion
Mr B Madlingozi (EFF) asked what the Department meant when they said that they were monitoring but were not ready to report. What was the main reason for them not to be ready to report? He said the Committee should not be told not to panic when nothing was being reported to it. How was the Department evaluating itself in terms of the work done or not done at the Netball World Cup?

The Chairperson reminded the meeting that the Department was there to report on its first quarter performance.

Mr A Zondi (ANC) asked if the Department would ensure that under-expenditure did not occur in the next quarter. What measures did the Department use to verify and validate provincial reports? There was a trend that the Department was overachieving its targets. Did this mean the Department was setting low targets? Why did the Department prioritise the provision of equipment and attire in quarter 1? Did the Department consider conducting an evaluation of the “I am the flag” programme and its impact on nation building? Were there any plans to enhance the programme?

Mr Joseph said he supported the question raised about ensuring that under-expenditure of R228m in Programme 1 was not repeated. In Programme 3, he asked if there was a record of attendance and what influenced the types of event in the days of celebrations. In Programme 4: Heritage Promotion, he asked who had the final say on routes and what processes were in place to help with the identification of the route holders. What were the costs and timeframes associated with the new internet web service? What was happening with the Department’s R85m contribution to the Sarah Baartman exhibition museum planner and had the disputes been resolved?

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) said there was a lack of accountability in the Silapha Wellness Intervention Programme initiative in Programme 2. How much had been spent on this initiative? What were the causes of the delays in the eight projects of target groups? She said provision was not made in provinces like the Free State, Western Cape, and Mpumalanga. Why was this the case? Why was a Gauteng school the only one that was provided with equipment?

Mr E Mthethwa (EFF) said he agreed with Mr Madlingozi that the report seemed to be a template, because the focus was on the internal monitoring of the Department as opposed to its impact on society. The Committee wanted to hear how many women, disabled, and youth were involved. What did the Department mean when it said that artists were placed in schools and what kind of schools were being referred to? What processes constituted internal monitoring and evaluation? What did the Department do in the cases of proven incompetence?

On monitoring and evaluation (M&E) measures, Ms Mandisa Tshikwatamba, DDG: Corporate Services (Programme 1), said the Department had a rigorous M&E process to verify information received. The Department had a special committee which worked with provinces to improve quality assurance. The Department was trying to minimise human errors by not getting the reports at the end of the quarter, but monthly. It was also trying to automate data coming from the provinces, but the software could only be acquired through the State Information Technology Agency (SITA), so the matter was in abeyance as it followed the SITA process.

On not meeting the target number of imbizos, she said one could count six sector consultations that the Minister has had, but these could not be classified as imbizos as they were ministerial outreach programs.

On the eight NPOs and the cause of delays, she said that in previous years there was a high number of applications which took the Department time to clear. In addition, some applicants who had to be assisted in their applications had not been funded before and new applications had to be registered with Treasury.

On incompetency within the Department, she said there were areas within the Department that were overstretched, given the vacancy rate and the movement of people which could have a negative effect. The Department gave bursaries, took people on courses and tried to augment its budget.

On how the Department was evaluating itself, especially relating to the Netball World Cup, Ms Sumayya Khan, DDG: Sport (Programme 2), said there was a post-World Cup process where Netball South Africa and the board met to look at all the work done to finalise it and write up the report on it, but it also required input from stakeholders and was accompanied by audited financial statements. There was a timeline for these aspects to be finalised. World Netball expected South Africa to submit the final report in December. The report would come to Cabinet and to the Committee.

On the issue of over-achievement, she said targets were set for some mass participation events but did not exclude others from participating; in some activities, extra funding was not required.

On over-achievement in support to athletes and academies, she said the target indicators were delivered by the provinces, which received requests from sports federations. A case in point was Banyana Banyana going to the World Cup and support was provided for them.

On equipment and attire, she confirmed that there was no target set for the first quarter as the Department worked on what the provinces sent in and many started procurement in April. It was risky, as one depended on procurement processes and that quarter’s spend was counted in the second quarter. Those who did get equipment in quarter one would have planned and processed the application in the fourth quarter of the previous financial year. Different provinces had different ways of processing equipment applications.

On how far progress was on the Sarah Baartman Museum infrastructure, Mr Lebogang Mogoera, Chief Director: Infrastructure (Programme 3), said the project was allocated to the Development Bank of South Africa (DBSA), which had requested time to do its own due diligence after which they had confirmed acceptance of the project in July. Progress at the end of September was that the tender for the contractor was issued and would close in mid-October.

Mr Irwin Langeveldt, Chief Director: Heritage (Programme 4), said the Sarah Baartman exhibition planner was appointed in the second quarter of 2022 and given an allocation of R6.1m in total for the installation and learning of two exhibitions at the centre. The service provider was the Khoi and the San Research Centre at UCT. The current focus would be alignment between the construction by the contractor and the exhibition content providers.

On the impact analysis of the “I am the flag” programme, he said the Department submitted a request to the South African Cultural Observatory (SACO) to do an impact study to enhance the current programmes on the flag, the anthem and the coat of arms. A study in 2001 found that recognition levels were low and this study was used as a basis for the current program to popularise awareness, like, for example, the “flag in every school” campaign. The Department was looking forward to the research SACO would be doing on behalf of the Department so that it could sharpen its initiatives to promote social cohesion.

On heritage routes, he said that the three resistance and heritage routes sites per province were identified by the provinces themselves. Cabinet approved 27 sites in 2015 and reports on the implementation of the heritage route sites were submitted quarterly to Cabinet.

On the issue of under-expenditure, Mr Mokgwamme said that it arose from transfer payments to the sports federations which was an under-expenditure of R57m because MoUs and checklists were incomplete. In the second instance, it was money to public entities due to not receiving audited financial statements and other compliance issues. He said the Department was looking to find a way to relax the conditions on the allocation letter as the federations needed the money at the beginning of the financial year.

On the same issue, Ms Khan added that the under-expenditure was due to sports federations not giving their applications by the end of June and the federations asked for an extension which then delayed all the other processes. Hence, there was a delay in getting all the compliance documents.

On the under-expenditure and the Presidential Employment Stimulus Programme, Ms Khumalo said the Department could only pay four percent of the amount used to start the implementation process. However, by the end of September, R180m of the R462m was transferred.

On the query about the Department not being ready to report, she said that the Department report said that they were not due for reporting and not that they were not ready for reporting. The Department adhered to the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME)’s template on monitoring.

On the issue of the national days, she said the Department had just started a process of reviewing national days and was looking to improve on inclusivity. It was also meant to show what opportunities there were within government. Youth Day in the Free State focussed on opportunities in government. The review would shape national days going forward. The Department included an impact assessment unit on targets aligned to economic benefits and value and to inform planning. SACO was the research wing of the Department.

She said the artists placed in schools programme was a programme done in collaboration with the Department of Basic Education. This indicator did not fall under those that were due for reporting. The focus of the programme was determined by the school.

She said there was accountability and responsibility for the Silapha Wellness Programme, but the Department would give more detail on the issues raised when presenting the annual report. R443 000 was disbursed for the first quarter.

Mr Mhlongo said that he had asked questions but the Department had not responded. He asked how far the appointment of the DG process was. How many people were employed in the M&E unit? What measures did the Department use to verify or validate submissions from provinces? How did the Department ensure that the reports they received were not fabricated? How many people living with disability benefited from unification? Why were uniforms and equipment distributed in quarters 2, 3, and 4 and not continuously throughout the year? What was the distinction between indicators in 2.2.3, 2.2.6 and 2.2.7. in the presentation? How were they measured and why were they separate? He said the Committee was still waiting for the report on Silapha. He said the Department transformation system was not working.
 
On the recruitment of the DG, Ms Khumalo said the selection panel had sat to do the short-list process and decided to cast the net wider and conclude the process by the end of the third quarter.

Regarding M&E, Mr Manase Makwela, Acting Chief Director: Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning, said the Department had five panel officials. 13 contractors assisted with the manual registers the Department received from the provinces. Their report was sent to M&E to check. Beyond that, there were sample site visits and the reports were sent to internal audit. The Department had the breakdown into men, women, people with disabilities etc and these could be sent to the Committee.

Regarding equipment and attire, Ms Khan said that the fact that no equipment and attire were procured in the first quarter did not mean there was no activity. Each province had their own plans, and many procured them in the fourth quarter for the first quarter of the next financial year. There was always a demand for equipment and attire.

On the transformation charter, she said this was an important document. A transformation commission, which played an oversight role, had been established. The work required technical expertise and the Department did not have all the expertise necessary to collect and analyse the data and write up the document. The Department previously had a director who was multi-skilled but attempts to get a new director with multiple skills were not bearing fruit. There has been progress on the transformation process if one looks at the situation when the process started.

Mr Teboho Thebehae, Chief Director: Sport, said that in the first quarter, there were over 100 000 participants, of which 2% were people with disabilities, 51% were male, and 49% were female community participants. In the Winter Games, 15% were people with disabilities, 49% were males and 51% were females.

Mr Mhlongo said one of the recommendations to the Department should be that M&E was understaffed which was not a good practice. On transformation, he said the Department had been doing the same thing for 13 years: federations set targets which were not achieved. The Department had to do something differently.

Regarding Silapha, Ms Khumalo said she had responded, but they were currently not in a pilot phase. A new tender was issued for a service provider to run a fully-fledged programme.

The Chairperson said she would love to see equality in sport.

Auditor-General on the audit outcomes of the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture and its entities

Ms Mbali Tsotetsi, AGSA Acting Business Unit Leader, said AGSA would look at the full financial year 2022/23. She said there was a slight regression over the current administration term from the first year of administration, and performance planning and reporting had impacted on service delivery as entities might not be able to track all key indicators linked to their respective mandates; there were challenges with the credibility of performance information in the annual report; and required performance achievement was difficult to measure. Performance against targets stood at 87%. Targets not achieved include in addressing its objectives, which include Medium-Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) targets relating to gender-based violence, transformation, safety in communities and building a nation with good morals, and the underachievement of a number of heritage facilities. Its overall observations of the key insights were that the Department did not implement oversight on the use of funds transferred to the Mzansi National Philharmonic Orchestra (MNPO); the Department allowed the National Arts Council (NAC) to disburse a higher tranche payment that was not aligned with the MoU; there was potential conflict of interest in that the chief executive and artistic director of the MNPO held similar positions in these orchestras; the expenditure report provided did not include a breakdown of the nature of expenditure nor were invoices provided. A material irregularity was transfer payments amounting to R7,5m made to a beneficiary for implementing a project in broadcasting.

Ms Omphemetse Setebe, AGSA Senior Manager responsible for DSAC, said the quality of financial statements performance was 89%, with the main qualification areas being the National Library of South Africa and Iziko Museum relating to heritage assets; and Freedom Park relating to property, plant and equipment, cash flow statements, and the statement of comparison of budget and actual amounts. She said revenue did not equal expenditure and 50% of the auditees ended the year in deficit. This means that service delivery could be impacted in the future. She said the portfolio had not adequately implemented action plans developed to respond to non-compliance findings raised in prior years and the entities continued to transgress laws and regulations, as previously reported. Irregular expenditure totalled R72m with 42% of it attributable to Robben Island. The key root causes of the Department’s performance were the slow response to implementation of recommendations, a lack of timeous implementation of consequence management, and a lack of recommended improvement of monitoring.

See attached for full presentation

Discussion
Mr Madlingozi said the NAC shenanigans and the MNPO had been with the Committee for the whole term and it seemed there would not be a solution to allegations surrounding them. How much money was involved, especially involving Mr Bongani Tembe and the MNPO, which was wasted or embezzled? How much money was the Department losing in paying one person in charge of two entities? Who were the beneficiaries of those monies when the AG followed the money? What did the AG mean when it said they could not measure indicators? What was the cause of this non-action? How long did it take for the Department to keep a project on hold, and which projects became victims? Did the AG find the Department guilty of financial mismanagement?

Mr Mthethwa asked how the AG validated that reports given to it were truly reflective of the facts. What consequence management was applicable based on their findings? It appeared that the AG had no power to enforce its findings. How did the AG resolve that there was no conflict of interest as one person was the CEO of three entities? Did that person recuse himself from discussions or declare a conflict of interest? Did the AG only wait for the Annual Reports or did it get red alerts during the year?

Mr Joseph asked about the accountability ecosystem slide in the AG’s presentation. He was concerned that many of the good things the AG had worked out for the Committee were still not in place in government. How many regulatory mandates were issued and were the Department and its entities included? He asked what the AG thought was fundamentally wrong with management when the new Mandela Bay Theatre complex entity was started. Was the R7,5m lost on the broadcasting project in the current financial year and was it part of the APP?

In relation to Treasury instructions, which limit disclosure of irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, Ms Sibiya asked what the AG's recommendation was. She asked what the Committee had to do if it could not get to do physical oversight visits.

The Chairperson said she was unhappy about consequence management and would discuss it further at the 17 October meeting with the Department.

Mr B Radebe (ANC) said the Committee itself must decide what it is going to do in the Committee week in January in terms of oversight visits. He said that the comment that there were a lot of fictional reports to the AG was disturbing. The Department should allocate officials to babysit or oversee all activities of entities. This should be the first line of defence. The AG report was a good report, giving indications of what to ask the Department when it appears the following week. He said non-payment of suppliers within 30 days was unacceptable. The survival of small companies in this sector would depend on cash flow. Another issue was the filling of vacant posts which was a serious challenge. He said that when the Budgetary Review and Recommendations Report (BRRR) was drawn up, the Committee should decide which entities needed urgent attention.

Addressing Mr Radebe, the Chairperson said their programming was victimising the Committee. The Committee had planned for oversight visits since 2021/22, and all these applications were rejected. This Committee was never given a chance to do oversight.

Mr Radebe said all Committees were equal and the Chairperson should raise those issues in the Committee’s report.

On the spending around the MNPO, Ms Tsotetsi said R41.5m was transferred in the financial year and the balance of the R54m was transferred in 2023/24. She did not have the figure for how much was spent on the artistic director at hand and also did not have the beneficiaries of the MNPO as it could not get a comprehensive report from the Department. It had seen the allocations, but not the actual expenditure.

On the meaning of an indicator not being measurable, she said the AG looked at the definition of an indicator given by the Department which reflected how the Department assessed whether it had achieved a target. The AG would look at that description to see whether it was a useful means of measuring. The Department had acknowledged that some indicators were not properly crafted.

On how much it cost to keep a project on hold, she said she could not give a definitive amount as it depended on each project and it would vary.

On validating reports, she said that the AG always looked for supporting evidence to reports, like invoices or other documentation.

On the issue of how AGSA enforced consequence management, she said the accounting authority had the responsibility to investigate financial misconduct and implement consequence management, which was why the AG recommended that the accounting officer exercise their role. Where there were irregularities, the AG could now issue material irregularities, which forced the accounting officer to perform the roles prescribed by the PFMA.

On the issue of conflict of interest, she said declarations were provided to them when certain matters regarding orchestras were discussed but the AG was still concerned on the matter of accountability if a person held so many positions and were accountable to themselves essentially.

On what the AG did when many red flags were highlighted, she said they did not wait for the final audit, followed up on the implementation of action plans, and conducted record reviews to highlight issues for the accounting officer to note before the end of the financial year. The AG also conducted APP reviews to flag indicators that were not measurable to the accounting officer for better definition.

She noted the comments on the accountability ecosystem and said everyone had a role to play.

On the number of material irregularities issued, she said she did not have the exact current number at hand, but in March, there had been 706 of which 430 involved national and provincial departments and entities. The final number would be tabled at the end of the year.

On the Mandela Bay Theatre complex, she said they did have some structures in place like the audit committee but they did have to go back and review what happened initially, as there was a lack of supporting documentation and questions around records management. They also needed to finalise their listing as a Schedule 3 entity and the accounting officer should provide Treasury with the necessary information.

On material irregularities around the broadcasting agency used to train young people, she said it was not a new matter and came from previous financial years between 2018/19 to 2020/21. The accounting officer has taken steps to recover the monies.

On instruction no. 4 from Treasury on the declaration of irregular and wasteful expenditure, she said it highlighted that the disclosures had to be current. The Committee, in their opinion, still had to oversee these monies and look at the figures that were now provided in the Annual Report because they would now not be part of the Annual Financial Statements (AFS). Because it was not in the AFS, the AG did not now provide an opinion on them.

Mr Mhlongo asked if the Minister made any conformation to address the gap in consequence management. Was there a time frame? Did the AG have one-on-one meetings with the Minister on identified risks?

Mr Madlingozi asked if the AG would not find the Department guilty of financial mismanagement.

On consequence management, Ms Tsotetsi said that when they had met with him, the Minister had made a commitment to provide oversight on consequence management, but he did not give any specific plans highlighting any particular investigations and there were no specific timelines given. The AG would be conducting a follow up later in the year.

On conflicts of interest, she said that this was also part of the issues raised at the meeting. She could not recall the Minister specifying his view on the matter.

On whether the Department was guilty of financial misconduct, she said there were findings were around material transfers including to MNPO, so there was no pronouncement on whether it was financial misconduct or not. These were key issues the Department needed to deal with.

Minister’s correspondence on the appointment of the Ad Hoc Committee for the reconstitution of the PanSALB Board

Dr Herman Tembe, Office of Institutions Supporting Democracy in the Speaker’s Office, provided advice on the Minister’s correspondence calling for the Committee to provide five names to be considered for inclusion on the ad hoc panel that would evaluate and recommend board members for a reconstituted Pan-South African Language Board(PanSALB). He spoke to section 5.3.a of the PanSALB Act which obliged the Minister had to consult with the Committee to nominate candidates for an ad hoc committee to recruit board members.

On the issue of the phrase “after consultation”, he said that after following the procedure, the Minister has to make a decision after consultation. The Minister did not require consensus or agreement.

On whether the Committee could be involved as members of the ad hoc committee, he said that members of the Committee would be evaluating nominees later. He said the Minister’s letter is part of the Minister’s consultation process, and the final decision lies with the Minister. The Committee should recommend five names for the ad hoc panel.

See correspondence attached

Discussion
Mr Madlingozi said South Africa still had laws blocking progress to be a rainbow nation. Why was South Africa still seeking validation from cases heard when black people were not treated as human beings? How could Members of Parliament enact laws protecting all South Africans if cases from the country's dark days still captured South Africa?

The Chairperson asked if he agreed that the Committee should come up with five names.

Mr Madlingozi agreed that the Committee do that.

Mr Mhlongo said this Committee was the only Committee that did not interview council or board members. He proposed that the Committee apply to be part of the interview panel from start to end and that the Minister consult the Committee in the sense of the Committee being part of the council appointments. Previously, it seemed like the members were serving the Minister, not the Committee. Did the Committee only nominate or was it part of the whole process? He wanted it to be part of appointments for all councils, not just PanSALB.

Ms Sibiya said the matter should be discussed on 17 October 2023.

Mr Mthethwa said his understanding was that the five people nominated by the Committee should be members of the Committee who would participate in the interviews. MPs represented different constituencies, so who would be chosen and who would be left behind? Would this not create another challenge as members would motivate for their party’s preferred candidate? Therefore he would prefer the involvement of five members representing the Committee.

The Chairperson said her understanding was that the five people would receive the nominations for the fully-fledged board. Members would not serve on the board.

On why old cases still influence current ones, Dr Tembe said that in law, precedent was used most of the time and they were authoritative.

On the issue of the Committee being the only one that did not conduct interviews, he said the whole process needed to be broken down.

The Chairperson said that the Committee had to come up with names and CVs and agree on the five names the Committee would forward to the Minister. The Committee would be short-listing the interviews and make recommendations to the Minister. After consultation with the Committee, the Minister would appoint a nine-member Committee to advertise and receive nominations. The Portfolio Committee did the short-listing from the received nominations. They interviewed them and made recommendations to the Minister. PanSALB was a constitutional body established under section 65, so it was different from other entities. The five members requested from the Committee were those who made up the initial ad hoc Committee to do the adverts and receive the nominations.

Mr Mhlongo said the Committee had to be part of the process, and for other boards. What mechanism could be used for the Committee to be consulted and be part of the process?

Dr Tembe said there were two ways to do that. Most amendments were initiated by the executive of the Department. But Members could initiate a bill to amend legislation. He recommended that the Committee inform the Minister that they would comply but request a condonation that the time required be from the time the letter was received and not from when it was dispatched.

2022/23 PanSALB Linguistic Human Rights Complaints Report

Ms Fiona Clayton, Committee Researcher, said the report reflected that the linguistic human rights complaints received in the past financial year were finalised and was sent to the Committee to be noted.

See attached

2023 Draft Fourth Term Committee Programme

The Committee Secretariat said Netball South Africa had sent a letter that it would not be ready for the meeting scheduled for Friday, 20 October.

The Chairperson said that Ms Khan had already indicated that Netball SA were not ready as they were still consulting with World Netball.

Mr Mthethwa proposed that the Cultural and Creative Industries Federation of South Africa (CCIFSA) appear in place of Netball South Africa on Friday to account on the Department’s reports on CCIFSA.

Mr Joseph proposed that Department update the Committee on the implementation of the White Paper.

The Chairperson emphasised the importance of the White Paper and that the Department update its communications on the White Paper.

Mr Madlingozi gave his support for the call to have CCIFSA present.

Ms V Malomane (ANC) said she supported the call for the update on the White Paper as it was a Committee priority.

The Chairperson proposed that the White Paper be dealt with on 15 October and that CCIFSA be the first item of the first quarter of next year’s programme.

Mr Mthethwa agreed to the proposal.

Mr Mhlongo highlighted the importance of oversight and holding the oversight of the Chair of Chairs in January.

The Chairperson proposed that the Committee adopt what the AG said and propose oversight visits in January.

Mr Zondi supported what was said by the Chairperson and seconded Mr Mhlongo’s proposal.

The adoption of minutes was deferred to the next day.

The meeting was adjourned.