ARC, OBP, PPECB & SAVC Annual Performance Plans 2024/25; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed the Members and the representatives from the entities of the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD):

• The Agricultural Research Council (ARC);
• Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP);
• The National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC);
• The Perishable Products Board (PPECB), and
• The South African Veterinary Council (SAVC).

She handed over to the entities to present their 2024/25 financial year Annual Performance Plans (APPs) and budgets.
 

Agricultural Research Council (ARC) 2024/25 APP and budget
Dr Joyene Isaacs, Chairperson, ARC, introduced her delegation, and said the mission of the ARC was to conduct research, develop partnerships and human capital, and foster innovation for a sustainable agriculture sector. As the principal agricultural research institution in South Africa, the ARC was well-positioned to deliver technologies for climate-resilient and sustainable agricultural systems for agrarian transformation and food and nutrition security. The ARC had defined its outcomes for the period 2020 - 2025, which direct its strategic focus and inform the outputs of this annual performance plan (APP) towards:

• Increased agricultural production and productivity:
• Sustainable ecosystems and natural resources;
• Improved nutritional value, quality, and safety of agricultural products;
• Skilled and capable agricultural sector;
• Enhanced resilience of agriculture;
• A high-performing and sustainable organisation.

This was the last year for the APP of the entity's five-year strategic plan (SP). The outgoing ARC Council had accepted the outcomes and recommendations of the ARC's institutional review (IR). Based on the review, management had prepared an implementation plan for the next five years to ensure that the organisation reflects on, learns from, adapts to, and adjusts to the outcomes and recommendations.

The previous Council's term had ended, and a new one had been appointed. The continuity of its programme had been secured, with five members from the previous Council having been re-appointed. The next SP and concomitant planning process would allow the ARC to adjust to both the new medium term strategic framework (MTSF) and the outcomes of the institutional review.

The organisation’s re-design had been completed and approved by the Council for implementation to commence. It continued with the five Council committees, and the social, ethics and governance (SEG) committee played a fundamental role in alerting the organisation to the importance of ethical behaviour and the imperatives of social interactions and governance demands.

Implementing the institutional review plan would include revitalising partnerships and stakeholder engagements, as well as organisational re-design and business process enhancement.

Dr Litha Magingxa, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), ARC, said the support for the entity's agriculture and agro-processing master plan (AAMP) had six pillars:
 

Pillar 1: Resolving policy ambiguities and creating an investment-friendly climate
Evaluation of farms: For example, the proactive land acquisition strategy (PLAS) needs assessment for land reform beneficiaries and agro-preneurship skills for youth and black farmers.

Pillar 2: Creating an enabling infrastructure
Technologies for water use efficiency and smallholder irrigation systems.

Pillar 3: Providing comprehensive farmer support, developmental finance, research and development (R&D), and extension services
Animal recording and improvement services, the Kaonafatso ya Dikgomo (KyD) scheme, diagnostic and analytical services in animal feed, animal health tests, soil tests, crop disease diagnostic tools, and drought-tolerant crop cultivars to help farmers mitigate and adapt to climate change.
 

Pillar 4: Food security, expanded production, and employment creation
Enhancing household access to nutrition-dense food, and adaptable traditional crop varieties.
 

Pillar 5: Enabling markets' expansion, improved market access and trade facilitation
On-farm technologies for agro-processing and value addition to crop and livestock commodities, KyD livestock auctions.
 

Pillar 6: Developing localised food, import replacement and expanded agro-processing exports
Development of new and improved crop and livestock production practices to enhance productivity for food and nutrition security.

Mr Magingxa said the foot and mouth disease (FMD) vaccine facility project inception, as well as the concept design and viability assessment of the project, had been completed and the detailed design development, as well as the procurement and appointment of the necessary infrastructure, should be completed within a few months.

Mr Abdul Carim, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), ARC, presented the budget of the ARC for the 2024/25 financial year, highlighting that the expected revenue for the year was expected to be around R1.9 billion, R2.0 billion in 2025/26, and R2.1 billion in the 2026/27 financial year.
The Chairperson said Members would have liked to have a meeting with the entities for the entire day so that the major issues highlighted could be dealt with to the satisfaction of the Committee. However, there was a sitting at 2pm, which all Members of Parliament (MPs) were expected to attend.
 

See attached for full presentation
 

Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP) 2024/25 APP and budget
Prof Peaceful Mabeta, Chairperson, Onderstepoort Biological Products (OBP), introduced the entity's team to the Committee. She said the OBP had been at the leading edge of animal health for many years, and, despite the many challenges, continued to be at the forefront as a manufacturer and distributor of animal health products. The Minister appointed a new board of directors, effective 1 November 2023, and had since been inaugurated.

The Board affirmed its commitment to provide strategic direction, influence performance, ensure financial sustainability, strengthen relations with stakeholders, and ensure sound governance at the OBP. It would guide and support the OBP to ensure that it was a world-class developer, manufacturer, and distributor of animal health products through the formulation of solutions that were underpinned by cutting-edge science and technology.

To strengthen the OBP’s delivery of its mandate, the following key strategic priority areas have been identified:

• Development of globally competitive products through technology and innovation - to ensure sustainability in the supply of quality products to the market.
• High performance - to cultivate a culture of service excellence.
• Good governance and leadership - to foster an ethical, developmental, and accountable corporate culture.
• Strategic human resource management - for improved talent acquisition, development, and retention.
• Company profitability - to ensure financial sustainability.

Dr Bethuel Nthangeni, Interim CEO, OBP, said the last few years had seen several disease outbreaks, such as avian influenza, African swine fever and FMD, to name a few. These had put a lot of pressure on the sector, as livestock producers had had to contend and respond to them, with serious economic consequences to their businesses, the agro-economy, and livelihoods. As a state-owned manufacturer of vaccines, OBP played a significant role in assisting and supporting the DALRRD’s efforts to respond promptly to the outbreaks, including those of FMD, by procuring and distributing the FMD vaccine where it was needed. OBP’s own manufactured products against diseases, such as African horse sickness, blue tongue, contagious abortion, etc, contribute to a stabilised animal health situation in the country and also prevent the spread of some animal diseases from animals to humans. OBP would partner with the DALRRD as per its public good mandate, to develop a contingency supply of certain vaccines over the short to medium term to improve biosecurity.

Dr Nthangeni said OBP vaccines, as part of its export business, also supported countries in other parts of the world in containing outbreaks of diseases like lumpy skin disease and Rift Valley Fever, where these occur. This part of the business continued to grow and would assist OBP in maintaining its favourable positioning in the vaccines market, whilst it addressed challenges around an ageing infrastructure that had negatively affected the uptime of the manufacturing plant, and the resultant supply of vaccines when needed. Efforts at improving maintenance and sourcing replacement equipment and machinery would continue, in line with the OBP’s quest for being the first choice in animal health solutions. It was aware of the requirements in export markets and, in that regard, would continue with the rollout of the roadmap towards good manufacturing process (GMP) certification.
 

See attached for full presentation

The Chairperson welcomed Ms Rosemary Capa, the Deputy Minister of Agriculture, to the meeting, notifying her that the Committee had just heard presentations from the ARC and OBP. She then asked the OBP's chairperson whether the entity's CFO would be attending the meeting.

Prof Mabeta said the CFO was on maternity leave.

Discussion
(Please note: poor audio quality rendered several questions, and subsequent responses, inaudible.)

Mr W Aucamp (DA) asked if there was any cooperation between the ARC and OBP to enhance their work. What work was being done by the ARC, working with government, to deal with the drought problems in the Northern Cape, North West and the Free State? The AAMP had been drafted for the unified DALRRD -- how would that change, considering that the Department had been split into two? What were the challenges in completing the building of the FMD vaccine facility and what was the ARC doing to address those challenges? It takes up to four years to get approval for vaccines, as was evident last year with the bird flu, when it took a while for vaccines to be approved. What could be done to shorten the time for vaccine approval?

Mr C Smit (ANC) wanted to understand the difference in the mandates of the ARC and OBP. The ARC had mentioned that there was a funding gap preventing them from completing the FMD facility. What was causing the funding gap? What were the challenges experienced by the ARC regarding the property plant in the audit report? How long was an interim CEO at OBP, and how far was the process to appoint a new CEO?
Regarding the outstanding legislation that the Minister mentioned in the previous meeting, he wanted to know whether any steps had been taken to ensure that outstanding legislation was passed. What were the timeframes regarding alternative electricity to mitigate against the challenges that existed with electricity supply? On opportunities for revenue generation, he wanted to know whether both the ARC and OBP had considered any options.

Mr A Trollip (Action SA) wanted to know how the ARC dealt with issues pertaining to alien plants and vegetation control.

Inkosi R Cebekhulu (IFP) said both organisations were more focused on commercial farming, rather than subsistence farming. Historically, OBP was an independent entity and could produce their own vaccines, but now they acquired vaccines from other countries. Why was the OBP failing to produce more vaccines on its own? What was the ARC doing about the foreign weed plants growing in the rivers and dams? What was it doing to ensure a reduction in the production of genetically modified foods?

Ms D Direko (ANC) said the ARC mentioned in their presentation that they have seven priorities, but she was more interested in the fifth one, which referred to spatial integration, human settlements, and local government. What was their relationship with local government, and what programmes were they running in collaboration with local government? When looking at local government, farmers faced many problems -- even when there was a drought, local farmers did not know how to declare disasters to ensure that they were given the necessary support. In their APP, the ARC had key focus areas, including revitalising partnerships with stakeholders -- did they have any positive stories they could tell the Committee in this regard? Did the ARC have any plans to deal with the unforeseen circumstances of climate change? What were the findings that were linked to the qualified audit outcome from OBP?

The Chairperson commented that the Department's presentation last week did not mention any work it was doing with small-scale farmers in its budget, especially with women, youth, and people living with disabilities.

OBP’s response

Dr Nthangeni explained the relationship between OBP and the ARC, saying the OBP did research work, but the research that it did was more about product development, while the groundwork of the research was done by the ARC.

Prof Mabeta said the CEO position had been vacant since 2021, and the interim CEO had started in the position in the position in May. The OBP board was a seven-month-old entity, and it had made the necessary submissions to the Department for the appointment of the CEO.

The Chairperson said the OBP could respond to some of the questions in writing to save time because more entities still needed to present.

Dr Nthangeni said the current OBP board had made it a priority that in its current term of existence, it would come up with a solution to the electricity supply challenge within the next three years, and the budget for this would R25 million, depending on the revenue earned. He said 40% of the revenue earned by the OBP came from the international market, as they produced vaccines for the European countries and other African countries. Regarding the number of subsistence farmers they supported, this year, the target was 2 500 farmers based in the rural areas. The OBP had a youth programme in which it was working with the Deputy Director-General (DDG) of Agriculture, where vaccines would be procured from OBP, and they would provide people to support the farmers in rural areas on when and how to use the vaccines.

The Chairperson said if the OBP had missed any questions from Members, they would have to include their responses in writing, including how the people who assisted with vaccinations in the rural areas did their work, who they were, and where they were stationed.

Mr Trollip said subsistence farmers were more susceptible to disease outbreaks than commercial farmers because controlling the outbreaks required isolation, and if one could not isolate defective plants, one could not control the outbreaks. The Department should explain how they controlled outbreaks in subsistence farming areas. In terms of losing the market share to international competitors, it was understandable that the country would sell its products abroad, because the Rand was weak, but local farmers could not obtain OBP products, meaning they had to buy the products from the international market because there was no local accessibility for the vaccines.

Deputy Minister Capa said the entities were answering grass-root level questions which the DDG was there to answer, because they involved the administrative processes of the Department. The entities should answer on the issues related to their work. She suggested that the DDG must be allowed to respond to the administrative matters that were raised by the Members.

The Chairperson said the DDG would be allowed to respond to the matters after the ARC’s responses. She asked them to only respond to matters related to their work, and the DDG would deal with the Department’s administrative matters.

ARC’s responses

Mr Carim said the qualified audit report had been an issue in the ARC for the past five financial years. The Auditor-General's (AG's) findings had been in the areas of property, plant and equipment, irregular expenditure, and revenue. The current financial year’s audit report was under way, but over the past three years, the ARC had improved on its findings on personal protective equipment (PPE), irregular expenditure, and revenue.

Dr Magingxa responded to the questions about drought and climate change, and said the ARC worked with a climate change model that had been active for more than a century, which was used to analyse the trends. They also relied on their responsibility to oversee the national public good and assets, and inform the Department about trending climate change matters, but it was the Department that formulated the plans of action to assist the farmers on the ground. The ARC assists the Department with the research, and the Department does the groundwork with the available funding it receives from the fiscus. There was an opportunity to grow foreign capital for the ARC, as it worked with the OBP and was in the advanced stage of refurbishing some of its laboratories using foreign funding. Over the years, the standards for how laboratories should work have changed over the years, but the ARC was proud of how it had maintained those changing standards.

The Chairperson asked Dr Magingxa to respond to one more question and then respond to the rest of the questions in writing so that the DDG could respond to the other questions.

Dr Magingxa said the ARC worked with the Department of Environment, Forestry, and Fisheries (DEFF) to identify and manage some of the issues regarding water, and the focus was on the development, identification and management of bio-control agents and chemical control methods. At the local level, the ARC provides a list of local municipalities where it could pinpoint the areas where it worked, and this could help the Members to track down where the ARC had been active, which could be found in the annual report. There was also the KYD (cattle improvement) programme, where the ARC worked with more than 12 000 farmers, and this was one of the programmes where the ARC assists farmers at the ground level.

Mr Dipepeneneng Serage, DDG: Agricultural Production, Biosecurity and Natural Resources Management, said the OBP and ARC were established for different purposes. The national Department was established to develop laws, policy, and regulations, while the ARC provides research findings in terms of production and services, and on the other hand, the OBP was responsible for the production of vaccines. The ARC had to find solutions to drought and climate change, etc, but it could not be found on the ground level where the provincial and local spheres of government operate. The OBP produces vaccines, but some were not meant for commercial use because they were not sold in the markets anymore. However, that did not mean those products should not be produced, because should a need for them arise, the products would be produced.

DDG Serage said the Department did not produce vaccines, but it registered them. If there was an outbreak, the Department waits for companies to apply, and then assesses the applications to ensure that they meet the requirements before vaccinations are approved, so if companies do not apply on time or they do not meet the requirements, the Department cannot do anything about it, because if anything goes wrong, it could be taken to court.

Follow-up questions

Mr Aucamp said people had waited a long time for vaccines to get approved during the bird flu outbreak, and asked how the Department could speed up the process of approvals, because there was no time for delays when the outbreaks happen.

Mr Trollip said the blue tongue outbreaks happen at a specific time of the year, and once winter stops, there was no more blue tongue, which meant people were not going to buy the vaccines, but when the outbreak happens, the vaccines were needed immediately. He was pleased to hear that the ARC used over a hundred years of data to adapt and develop mitigating circumstances against climate change. This was very important because one could measure how much rain one had in a year and think it had been a good year, but it could result in a natural disaster in the end.

The Chairperson thanked the ARC and OBP delegations for availing themselves for the meeting, and reminded them to respond to the outstanding questions in writing within seven days.

She welcomed the National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC), the Perishable Products Export Control Board (PPECB), and the South African Veterinary Council (SAVC) delegations to the meeting. She allocated each entity 10 minutes to do their presentation to save time so that Members could ask questions.

National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC) 2024/25 APP and budget

Mr Angelo Petersen, Chairperson, NAMC, introduced the delegation to the Committee. 

Dr Simphiwe Ngqangweni, CEO, NAMC, said the mandate of the NAMC was to provide statutory and other regulatory measures to investigate, recommend to the Minister, report to the Minister, oversee the administration, and monitor and review the application of statutory and other regulatory measures. It also provides advisory services to undertake investigations and advises the Minister regarding agricultural marketing policy and its application, coordination of agricultural marketing policy concerning national economic, social and development policies and international trends and developments, and the possibilities for, and effects of, promoting the objectives of the Marketing of Agricultural Products (MAP) Act, namely:

The increasing of market access for all market participants;
The promotion of the efficiency of the marketing of agricultural products;
The optimisation of export earnings from agricultural products; and
The enhancement of the viability of the agricultural sector.

He said the strategic outcomes of the NAMC include a valuable and efficient agricultural sector generating optimal export earnings, ensuring that it delivers on its mandate and core functions, and enhanced market access for the agricultural sector participants. Its estimated budget in the medium term expenditure framework (MTEF) period was R51.8 million for 2025/26, and R54.4 for 2026/27.

See attached for full presentation

Perishable Products Export Control Board (PPECB) 2024/25 APP and budget

Mr Nkhangweni Rambau, Chairperson, PPECB, introduced the delegation from the PPECB to the Committee.

Mr Lucien Jansen, CEO, PPECB, said the strategic projects of the Board include data provision, leadership development, and laboratory improvements. The focus area was to shift from being a regulator to an enabler entity by further improving its customer experience, providing relevant and timeous information, making continuous improvement through transformation, innovation, and digitisation, and improving business efficiencies to ensure effective service delivery to contain costs, as well as improving the business sustainability of black smallholder farmers and suppliers.

Mr Johan Schwiebus: CFO, PPECB, said 62% of the budget allocation for the 2024/25 financial year would be allocated to statutory operations, 17% to corporate services, 14% to Information technology, 5% to food safety, and 2% to development.
 

See attached for full presentation
 

South African Veterinary Council (SAVC) 2024/25 APP and budget

Mr Mongezi Menye, Registrar/CEO, SAVC, said the entity's mission was to protect the interests of those dependent on animals by safeguarding the health and welfare of all animals and the environment, assuring veterinary public health, and by regulating the educational, ethical, and clinical standards of the veterinary and para-veterinary professions. The strategic goals set out in the 2024/25 APP include transformation, service excellence and customer care, stakeholder engagement, and the creation of a digital SAVC.

Mr Sive Nqawe, CFO, SAVC, said the SAVC did not receive any income from government funding and derived 91.83% of its income from registries, examination and inspection fees, and about 8.17% from other income.
 

See attached for full presentation

The Chairperson asked Members to ask questions they would like answered in the meeting, and said they could ask the other questions in writing so that the entities could respond.
 

Discussion

Mr Trollip said the NAMC said it was introducing emerging commercial farmers to the market, and he had personal experience of emerging commercial citrus growers having a pack house bought for them so they could export produce and be compliant with international export requirements. However, the pack house was not profitable, not suitable, and the cost was double that of a normal commercial pack house, and they had to compete with commercial farmers, which was troubling because it made their lives more difficult. He asked the NAMC to bear that in mind when implementing the project.

He had also experienced the great work done by the PPECB in terms of export compliance and biosecurity, but there were anti-competitive trade barriers imposed by the competing markets, specifically in the European market around citrus, where they required South African farmers to export products at a reduced temperature, which increased the costs tremendously. What was the PPECB doing to help contest these anti-competitive behaviours being implemented by the European market? Lastly, the SAVC had mentioned it had given notice to the University of Fort Hare, Free State University, and the Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, that it had received their applications. Which university was going to be the second veterinary facility? He would be happy to receive the responses in writing.

Mr Smit referred to market access, especially for smallholder farmers, and said that from his experiences in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP), smallholder farmers needed to produce for a predetermined market if they wanted to be competitive. He had asked those farmers why they were not working together so that they could compete against established commercial farmers. How would the NAMC and the Department assist these farmers in that regard? The budget did not address the need for market access for smallholder farmers.

The SAVC had mentioned that only 10% of the 3 700 veterinarians were people of colour, and he asked how they planned to speed up transformation in that regard. How did they intend to ensure interest in their career paths increased? He was also happy to have his questions responded to in writing.

Inkosi R Cebekhulu (IFP) said that as the SAVC struggled to produce veterinarians in rural areas, who was responsible for ensuring that veterinarians assisted in the poverty-stricken areas?

Mr W Aucamp (DA) asked the PPECB to provide examples in writing of the effect that the international courts had on the production of South African export products. What could be done to improve the export products? To the SAVC, he wanted to know what the current shortfall of qualified veterinarians in South Africa was, and what effect the new institutions would have on producing veterinarians.

Mr S Sekoati (ANC) asked the NAMC how well they worked with the provinces to ensure that they provided accessible facilities and how they worked with smallholder farmers to help them deal with compliance issues. The shortage of veterinarians was almost non-existent in the rural areas, so how did the SAVC intend to increase the number of veterinarians operating in those areas?

Mr Z Mthethwa (MK) said the benchmark to evaluate the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development was the Land Act of 1915, in which black people had been reduced to 13% of the land, and 87% given to the whites. After the land was taken from black people, it was allocated to the agricultural sector, and the remainder was given to the private sector, and after 111 years, South Africa was still in the same situation. In terms of legacy and transformation, the Committee should establish a benchmark.

The Chairperson asked Mr Mthethwa to raise questions based on what had been presented by the entities.

Mr Mthethwa said there were three agricultural experts who had been deployed to the Department of Correctional Services in Mpumalanga. The government had said it was short of skilled expertise in the agricultural sector, but it had put PhD level experts in the sector into another department.

The Chairperson said that question was not relevant to the meeting, but was perhaps relevant to the Department.

Mr K Madlala (MK) asked for a report on the PPECB's strategic plan to improve business for black small-scale farmers.

The Chairperson asked the Chairpersons of the entities to send written responses to the questions asked by Members by next Tuesday. She asked them to write the response in a manner that would broaden the understanding of the Members.

SAVC’s response

Mr Menye said in 2022, the former Minister had approved a rule that allowed animal technicians and animal health promoters to operate on their own account, and they could open animal health facilities in rural areas. The rule was currently being implemented, and SAVC was working with different agriculture organisations to help them with the running of those facilities. However, the challenge that remained was that there were not many veterinarians produced in the country, especially in the rural areas.

Mr Sekoati wanted to know the number of veterinarians that the SAVC produced per annum.

Mr Menye said they produced between 140 and 160 veterinarians per year.

Department response

DDG Serage said the Department wanted to produce veterinarians in rural areas, but there were no places to accommodate them and no resources to support their work. The second issue was that out of the 140 veterinarians that were produced in the country annually, about 100 left the country to work overseas. It costs more than R1 million to produce one veterinarian, but they leave the country when they graduate. The Department would be reviewing its programme to see how it could solve the problem, but it must be highlighted that it was unfair to have veterinarians going to work in under-resourced rural areas, where they face massive challenges, including being underpaid. While the Department did not have enough veterinarians, it also had to be careful not to overproduce. The other problem was the lack of career guidance for this programme, especially for black people in townships and rural areas.  

Deputy Minister’s response

Deputy Minister Capa said although the Minister of Agriculture had sent an apology in writing for his absence, he had ensured that she would attend both meetings of the Portfolio Committee, in the course of which she had learnt that the issues that were discussed in the first meeting with the Portfolio Committee on Land Reform and Rural Development, including rural clusters, were also supposed to be discussed in the current meeting. She assured the Members that nothing would be lost in translation between the two Committees, because the split of the Committees must still be pronounced, and the processes would be outlined. Fortunately, there would also be Cluster Cabinet Committees, where the cluster accords the functions and mandates of departments, and it would be clarified what each Department would be doing.

She referred to the issue of inequality, in the sense that there were two agriculture sectors in South Africa, with one being for the poor and the rural and the other being for those who had managed to upgrade themselves into agri-businesses. The quest of the Department was to uplift those who were downtrodden, but it would not allow the commercial and agri-businesses to die. It was important for the Portfolio Committee to find a way to uplift those at the lower level without diminishing those who were already at the top. Priority number one of the Department was transformation towards equality.

The Department would continue ensuring that some meetings would involve joint meetings of the Portfolio Committee of Land Reform and Rural Development and the Agriculture Portfolio Committee.

The Department was there to lead the entities because if the entities were not doing well, the Department would be blamed. The Department and entities come before the Committee as a team, and the Department also holds them accountable so that they provide information before the Committee, because they could well be able to mislead the Committee, as they meet with it only a few times during a quarter.

She asked the Committee’s administration to give it the legacy report of the 6^th Parliament of the DALRRD, as it would help the Committee to understand how far the Department had gone with the outcomes of its programmes so that it could move forward from thereon.

Conclusion

The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister, the DDG, as well as the delegation from the entities, for availing themselves for the meeting. She assured them that the Committee would invite them again to have a longer discussion on the outstanding issues, and allowed them to exit the meeting while the Committee dealt with its internal matters.

She said this was the second time the Deputy Minister had alluded to the legacy report, and said it would be presented to the Committee in its next meeting.

Mr Smit asked that the Committee Secretary keep a register of the questions that had to be responded to by the entities in writing, to ensure that they were adequately responded to.

The Chairperson said the Secretary had noted all the questions. She had arranged with the Committee Secretary to arrange a meeting where the Committee would consider the legacy report, but unfortunately, that could not be done because it was half-a-day because of a parliamentary sitting. She proposed that the Committee consider the legacy report at its first meeting after recess.

Mr Smit suggested that his previous request for a register of questions should be standard procedure for the Committee for easy tracking and ensuring that the Committee's activities were outcome-based.

The Chairperson agreed.

The meeting was adjourned.