Questions and Replies

Reply:

With regards to the above information requested please see attachment - Annexure A.

 

 

Reply:

1. SAA has a sponsorship agreement with SAFA in a form of flights for (i) members and (ii) staff of Bafana Bafana and all SAFA National Team Squads. The costs for the flights relating to the sponsorship for each financial year are listed in the table below:

Sponsored Entity	Period	Value of tickets issued
SAFA	April 2016 – March 2017	R6.5m
SAFA	April 2017 to date	R4.5m

2. No, the Chairperson did not play any part in setting up the sponsorship with SAA. SAA received a proposal from SAFA. The request for sponsorship was assessed in accordance with the Sponsorship Policy and negotiated by the SAA Commercial team. In line with normal approval processes for a sponsorship of this size, the business case was tabled with the board for final approval.

Please note that:

• All SAA sponsorships are offered strictly on a Value-In-Kind (VIK) basis. This refers to the value of flight tickets offered. There is no cash outlay to SAFA arising out of the sponsorship.
• The sponsored tickets are subject to seat availability and as such revenue paying passengers are not inconvenienced.
• The sponsored parties are liable for airport taxes.

Reply:

The process steps undertaken to appoint a new Chief Commercial Officer for SAA consists of the following:

Step	Action	Detail
1	Advertise position	Placed internal and external advertisement in Sunday Times and SAA’s E-recruitment system (Neptune) with closing date 1 August 2017
2	Shortlisting	Shortlist applications received against advertised criteria
3	Shortlist finalisation	Present shortlist to Acting CEO and Acting GM HR and agree on final shortlisted candidates
4	Establish Interview/ Selection Panel	Identify and establish interview panel. Set tentative interview date
5	Competency Based Interviews	Arrange and conduct competency based interviews with panel
6	Assessments	Arrange for assessments to be completed on recommended candidates who are successful with interview phase
7	Pre-employment checks	Arrange pre-employment checks (reference and background checks) on recommended candidates
8	Consolidate selection results	Consolidate results (interview, assessments and pre-employment checks) and present results to selection panel
9	Final decision on preferred candidate	Selection panel makes decision on preferred candidate
10	Recommend preferred candidate	Recommend preferred candidate and remuneration package for approval by Board
11	Offer to successful candidate	Offer issued to successful candidate
12	Inform unsuccessful candidates	Inform/ regret unsuccessful candidates

(a) Current status

The Chief Commercial Officer position was advertised and reached closing date on the 1 August 2017. A total of 107 applications were received (50 through E-recruitment system and 55 through Sunday Times).

A provisional shortlist has been compiled and a shortlist discussion is scheduled with Acting CEO and Acting GM HR on the 11 August 2017.

Reply:

1. The Minister has initiated proceedings in the High Court to review and set aside the remedial action of the Public Protector.

2. The SARB initially issued an urgent application on 27 June 2017 on a limited attack and issued its full review application on 31 July 2017. The application by the Minister and SARB together with that of ABSA have since been consolidated by direction of the Deputy Judge President of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria.

3. The Minister issued a statement on the matter on 05 July 2017, indicating the steps that he intended taking regarding the report.

Reply:

The Minister of Finance has not been informed of any adjustment to the powers and functions of any (a) Local or (b) district municipality in terms of section 85(9A)(b) of the Local Government:  Municipal Structures Act, Act 117 of 1998, as amended, before December 2015.  Therefore, the question relating to (i) is not applicable (ii) is not applicable and (iii) is not applicable.

Reply:

1. Yes the Minister attended an international investor road show in April 2017.

(2)(a)(i) The Minister travelled economy class in the United States of America (USA).

(2)(a)(ii) The Deputy Minister travelled economy class in the USA.

(2)(a)(iii) Additional persons who accompanied Minister travelled economy class in the USA.

(2)(b)(i)	(2)(b)(ii)(aa)	(2)(b)(ii)(bb)
Intercontinental Barclay Boston Harbor Hotel Ritz-Carlton Crown Plaza JFK Grand Hyatt	R491 544*	R358 984 R77 753 R36 400 R13 620 R4 797

* This figure is inclusive of amounts paid for accommodation and venues hired for meetings.

(3) R978 463.70

NW2135E

SIGNATURE PAGE

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTION FOR WRITTEN REPLY

QUESTION NUMBER: 1923 [NW2135E]

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 23 JUNE 2017

Recommended/Not Recommended

S Mngomezulu

Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services

Date:

Reply:

a) No. In September 2014, Cabinet approved a support package to be provided to Eskom. Amongst other elements, the support package included an allocation of R23 billion to Eskom which was to be funded through the sale of non-strategic assets. The main purpose of the allocation was to ensure Eskom’s sustainability, energy security and ultimately to ensure economic growth. At the time, Eskom’s financial health was in a precarious position and the company was also experiencing operational challenges. Therefore, government’s inability to make the allocation would have, amongst other things limited the utilities ability to borrow money, compromised the entity’s going concern assumption, increased the risk of load shedding etc. All of which would have had dire consequences for the utility and the economy as a whole. Moreover, at that time Eskom’s inability to provide reliable supply of electricity was identified as one of the reasons for the slump in economic growth.

b) As part of the Presidential review committee (PRC) recommendations, the National Treasury was tasked with developing a framework for disposal of non-core assets which will amongst other things set out the criteria for state ownership and disposal as well as the benefits and costs thereof. This criteria is currently being developed and once finalised will be taken through the necessary approval processes and shared with relevant parties.

Reply:

1. Yes, an Inter-Departmental Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) Committee is in the process of being set up. In addition, we plan to have a separate and dedicated consultative structure to facilitate engagements with accountable institutions in the private sector.

(a) The Committee will be chaired by Director-General of the National Treasury or his representative.

(b) The Committee will (initially) consist of representatives of National Treasury, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the Department of Home Affairs, the State Security Agency, the South African Police Service, the National Prosecuting Authority, the South African Reserve Bank, the Financial Services Board and the Financial Intelligence Centre. The first meeting will also consider inviting other relevant departments or agencies for future meetings.

(c) The functions of the Committee are:

i) to co-ordinate South Africa’s response to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), including preparing for the Mutual Evaluation and the National Risk Assessment to facilitate compliance with international obligations;

ii) to inform discussions on potential changes to the country’s measurers against money laundering and terror financing, including changes to laws, regulations and other measurers;

iii) to assist in the allocation and prioritization of resources by competent authorities to combat money laundering and terror financing;

iv) to harmonise and align approaches to financial investigations, prosecutions, convictions and asset forfeitures in money laundering and terrorist financing matters;

v) to assess the effectiveness of anti-money laundering and combating of financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) policies and practices and whether the key objectives of the South African institutional framework against these phenomena are being met in practice;

vi) to assess progress made in South Africa with implementing the AML/CFT legal framework against the benchmark of the international standards and making recommendations for improvement; and

vii) assist in preparing the relevant departments and agencies for regular country assessments, peer reviews to measure South Africa’s compliance with international standards on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

2. No interim forum has been established outside of the normal National Treasury internal processes, in collaboration with the Financial Intelligence Centre, and other financial sector regulators, to process the feedback emanating from the public comments in order to, among other things, give effect to the establishment of the Inter-Departmental AML/CFT Committee.

(a) As I stated previously, in PQ 1634 [NW1840E], dated 9 June 2017, I want to point out again that we will be putting in place more effective consultation mechanisms, and that we do not need legislation to do so.

(b) More details relating to the establishment and operations of the Inter-Departmental AML/CFT Committee will be made available after the public consultation processes have been finalised, together with the publication of the final set of provisions of the Financial Intelligence Amendment Act, 2015 on 2 October 2017.

Reply:

Number of complaints each year

Financial period	Total number
2013/14	156
2014/15	1270
2015/16	2133
2016/17	3188

Note: It is not possible to provide details relating to categories because each complaint may have more than one category.

(2) What number of complaints, if possible in each category, indicated as (a) percentages and (b) numbers in each specified year was (i) successful and (ii) unsuccessful?

Year	% Successful	Number	% Unsuccessful	Number
2013/14	59%	92	41%	64
2014/15	32%	409	68%	861
2015/16	59%	1172	41%	961
2016/17	45%	1236	55%	1490

Note: 1. It is not clear what is meant by “successful” and “unsuccessful” in this question. The answers above were provided on the basis that successful means that the complaint was successfully lodged in that it falls within the Tax Ombud’s mandate and unsuccessful means the complaint falls outside the TO’s mandate.

2. As at 31 March 2017, there were 462 complaints yet to be validated.

NW1819E

Reply:

The Office of the Chief Procurement Officer (OCPO) has not conducted a skills audit in procurement across all spheres of Government. It is the responsibility of each Accounting Officer / Head of Department to conduct a skills audit within his / her institution to ensure that SCM officials are trained and deployed in accordance with the requirements of the “Guide for Minimum Training and Deployment of Supply Chain Management officials” issued as Practice Note Number SCM 5 of 2004 on 27 October 2004, in accordance with the Regulations in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999: Framework for Supply Chain Management that was promulgated in Government Gazette Number 25767 on 5 December 2003.

However, the OCPO in partnership with the Chief Directorate: Capacity Building in the Office of the Accountant-General (OAG) have conducted a Supply Chain Management (SCM) Baseline Study which seeks to determine the number, demographic profile and qualifications of SCM officials (practitioners and managers) that are currently employed in the national, provincial and local spheres of government. There were two phases to the project, the first being the collection of organisational data and the second being an individual survey.

Phase 1 required each government department or municipality to provide the number of approved funded, filled and vacant posts in the SCM Unit, including the names of SCM officials, their job title and email address, together with an approved organisational structure of the SCM Units or an approved organogram depicting the SCM function in the organisation.

Phase 2 required SCM officials to complete an online individual survey depicting an individual’s personal details; demographic profile (nationality, race, gender, age, occupational role and salary level); formal academic qualifications completed, currently studying or interested in undertaking; SCM training courses completed or interested in completing; number of years employed in public sector SCM, including the number of years employed in the different elements of the South African public sector SCM Model (demand, acquisition, contract, logistics, disposal, supply chain risk and performance management as well as asset management).

The results of the baseline study will inform the development of responsive and appropriate capacity development solutions and enable state institutions to channel resources into the areas where they will contribute the most to capacity development interventions, employee training and development, as well as enhancing staff morale and organisational performance.

The SCM baseline study with regards to Contract Management in the three spheres of government reveals the following:

Number of staff employed in Contract Management and SCM Units

Description	National Departments 43 out of 47	Provincial Departments 121 out of 123	Municipalities 203 out of 257	Total
Contract Management	88 (3%)	181 (3%)	171 (7%)	440 (4%)
Total number of staff in SCM (filled posts)	3 345	5 596	2 363	11 304

Number of staff who completed Contract Management courses

Description	National	Provincial	Municipalities	Total
Contract Management (PFMA)	103 out of 1995 courses completed (5%)	266 out of 2993 courses completed (9%)	4 out of 418 courses completed (1%)	373 (7%)
Contract Management (MFMA)	2 out of 1995 courses completed (0%)	None	19 out of 418 courses completed (4.5%)	21 (1%)

In addition, in respect of SCM human resource development:

The National Treasury in partnership with the Department for Public Service and Administration (DPSA), Department of Cooperative Governance (DCoG), the National School of Government (NSG) and other stakeholders through public sector forums, committees, meetings and reference groups developed the Public Financial Management (PFM) Capacity Development Strategy (CDS). Government departments, chief financial officers, provincial accountant-generals, provincial treasuries and capacity development specialists contributed to this process.

The CDS represents the National Treasury’s coherent strategy and plan of action to support the development of good public financial management. The strategy provides a national perspective to address financial management capacity constraints in the public sector. These challenges include scarce skills; high levels of vacancies and staff turnover; a lack of suitable education, training and development programmes; limited knowledge management; inadequate monitoring and evaluation; ineffective performance management; non-adherence to legislation; poor audit results; and an absence of effective partnerships. The CDS is based on a range of diagnostics that amongst others indicated a need for improving PFM practitioner skills and knowledge through targeted education training and development solutions. There is a strong focus on supporting individuals to achieve their personal and professional aspirations.

 

During 2015, we published the Supply Chain Management (SCM) Review which made reference to the following SCM capacity development initiatives that are underway:

• Generic functional structures for CFOs’ offices and for provincial treasury SCM support functions;

• SCM competency framework that defines the knowledge and skills required to operate effectively within an SCM unit;

• SCM master curriculum; and

• Development of an individual skills development assessment toolkit (i-Develop) to help individuals (practitioners) and institutions to identify their SCM human resource development needs.

The SCM i-Develop is an online tool for individual self-assessment of SCM competencies and other PFM competencies. During 2016, SCM i-Develop was piloted in select KZN provincial departments profiling 146 SCM practitioners. All the assessed SCM practitioners completed their self-assessment of 105 competency statements covering competency clusters for:

• Demand Management
• Acquisition Management
• Logistics Management
• Contract Management
• Disposal Management
• Risk and Performance Management and
• General Competencies (such as strategic capabilities, change management, and computer skills).

The self-assessment was found to be applicable to the actual work of the SCM practitioners. The online tool was easy to use however the reporting functionality required further enhancements.

Number of officials assessed per department (KZN Province):

Department	Number of officials assessed
Department of Arts and Culture	8
Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs	7
Provincial Treasury	7
Department of Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs	16
Department of Transport	12
Department of Community Safety and Liaison	8
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development	8
Provincial Legislature	6
Department of Sport and Recreation	6
Department of Health	10
Department of Education	12
Department of Social Development	20
Department of Human Settlements	17
Department of Public Works	9
Total	146

The overall objectives of the project were to:

• Identify the knowledge, skills and attributes (KSAs) that SCM staff need, the KSAs that SCM staff have, and the areas for development, thereby enabling an organisation to channel resources into the areas where they will contribute the most to human resource development, individual and organisational performance, and staff morale.

• The toolkit is also intended to direct and advise participants on relevant education, training and development (ETD) solutions available and to prioritise the ETD solutions based on research and consultation, and linked to organisational, team and individual objectives.

The second phase of implementation includes the rollout of the SCM i-Develop toolkit in another three (3) provinces, namely, the Gauteng, North West and Western Cape. The project implementation is currently funded by the European Union through the Financial Management Improvement Programme (FMIP). This will allow for the web-based SCM i-Develop toolkit to be tested further and enhanced. In April 2018, the final version of the SCM i-Develop toolkit will become available to all Provincial and National Departments.

The third phase of implementation aims to sustain the development and implementation of the SCM i-Develop toolkit. The National Treasury, Chief Directorate: Capacity Building, in the Office of the Accountant-General, will facilitate workshops with the Provincial Treasuries and Provincial Departments. Ownership and responsibility to conduct the competency assessments will be bestowed on the Accounting Officers supported by the respective HR units and SCM managers.

Reply:

(a-b) No.

Reply:

1. Yes, the National Treasury completed the investigation into allegations made against the Financial and Fiscal Commission in April 2017.

a) The scope of investigation comprised of financial misconduct; and supply chain management and personnel management irregularities.

b) Investigation into allegation of fraud, corruption, fruitless and wasteful expenditure and maladministration at FFC.

c) The main findings and recommendations are contained in the detailed report and submitted to the FFC Commissioners on 8 May 2017.

d) The investigation was conducted with the co-sourced forensic investigation firm called Bowman Gilfillan and the total forensic investigation fees paid to the firm amounted to R1,3 Million.

2. The National Treasury will not make the report public, as it is the subject of a criminal investigation by the South African Police Services. It will only made public by the National Prosecuting Authority, when it is in the court of law.

 

Reply:

There a number of state banks that are already operating, including the Land Bank, Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA), Postbank and many other Development Finance Institutions (DFIs). The Minister of Finance is responsible as the executive authority for the Land Bank and DBSA, and the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services for the Postbank. The province of KwaZulu-Natal also owns Ithala Bank. Aside from the Postbank and Ithala, none of the other banks are retail deposit-taking banks, and none of these banks are registered in terms of the Banks Act, as they are often established in terms of their own legislation, or by an exclusion or exemption from the Banks Act (a practice we intend to phase out). Hence, both the Postbank and Ithala have submitted applications for a bank license to the Registrar of Banks at the South African Reserve Bank (Registrar of Banks).

The National Treasury has no plans to establish a new state bank. Neither can any province establish a new state bank in terms of section 125(2)(b) of the Constitution (which only permits provinces to engage in functional areas which are listed in Schedule 4 and Schedule 5 of the Constitution), and we are only dealing with legacy provincial banks like Ithala (which is the only remaining one) in terms of Schedule 6 the Consitution. Rather, the initiatives around Postbank and Ithala are to ensure that all state deposit-taking banks operate in future in terms of a bank license in terms of the Banks Act, and the National Treasury assists the relevant departments to remove some legal and structural impediments that currently prevent them from applying for a bank license.

Whilst there is an initiative to review and possibly consolidate some of the DFIs, there is no intention to consolidate the different banks into one ‘one’ state bank, as they serve different markets (e.g. agriculture and land, municipal infrastructure and retail banking). The Department of Human Settlements is in the process of merging the three DFIs under its watch (National Housing Finance Corporation (NHFC); National Urban Reconstruction Housing Agency (NURCHA) and the Rural Housing Loan Fund (RHLF), to create one Human Settlements DFI. There is also the process of merging the National Empowerment Fund (NEF) into the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC). All these consolidating initiatives are led by other national departments, and do (and should) involve consultations with the National Treasury before such plans are finalised, and submitted to Cabinet for approval.

Major South African State Banks and DFIs

Institution	Sector	Funding Model
IDC	Industrial/SMME	Wholesale/Self-Funded
SEFA (Small Enterprise Finance Agency)	SMME and BEE	Government transfer (via IDC)
NEF		Government transfers and self-funded
DBSA (Development Bank of Southern Africa)	Infrastructure	Wholesale/ Self-Funded
NHFC	Housing	Wholesale/Government transfer/ Multilateral and bi-lateral loans
NURCHA		Wholesale/ Government transfers/ Self-Funded
RHLF		Government transfer/ Self-Funded
Land Bank	Rural Development	Wholesale/ Self-Funded
Ithala	Savings/transactional	Government transfers/ Deposits
Postbank		Deposits

*Smaller or provincial DFIs are not included in the table

2. The National Treasury has been working together with the Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services to establish the Postbank division of the South African Post Office (SAPO) as a stand-alone state bank with its own governance structures separate from the SAPO. The Postbank was granted authorisation to establish a bank by the Registrar of Banks in July 2016, and it submitted its application for registration as a bank to the Registrar of Banks on 26 June 2017.

However, decisions relating to the institutional form have not been finalised, and will depend on regulatory requirements as required by the Registrar of Banks at the SARB, taking into account the possible costs for the fiscus (both current and future) associated with various institutional arrangements.

3. (a-b)There is no intention to fund any equity holding in any state bank from the Government Employees Pension Fund or any other state pension or provident fund. The National Treasury is still engaging with the Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services on the funding of the Postbank, the expectation is for the Postbank to be funded or capitalised from its own resources, as we want to minimise any funding from the fiscus or via the sale of government assets. It is anticipated that all state banks will operate on a commercial basis, and profitably, and will not need to have recourse to the fiscus.

4. (a-c) Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services, who is the executive authority for the Post Office (of which the Postbank is a division).

Defining the specific market failure or gap in the market that the state bank is to address will be an important policy decision. Any bank that lends to retail customers opens itself to great risks, and that is why we want all such banks to be regulated in terms of the Banks Act and properly supervised by the Registrar of Banks at the SARB, to ensure that we minimise any lending and other risks to the fiscus.

5. (a-b) Not applicable, as there are no new state banks that are to be created. With regard to the Postbank, I refer you to the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services, who is the executive authority for the Post Office (of which the Postbank is a division).

Reply:

NATIONAL TREASURY

(a) No

1. N/A
2. N/A
3. N/A
4. N/A

ASB

The Accounting Standards Board has not issued any tenders, nor have we appointed any transaction advisors for tenders in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

CBDA

CBDA did not appoint any advisors for tenders

DBSA

(a) NO

(i) (ii) (iii)(iv) N/A

FSB

No such appointments were made by the Financial Services Board.

(i) – (iv) not applicable.

FIC

The Financial Intelligence Centre did not appoint transaction advosirs for tenders in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016

GEPF

The GEPF did not appoint any transaction advisors for any of the tenders it has issue since 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2016.

GPAA

No transaction advisors for tenders were appointed for the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

IRBA

IRBA does not appoint transaction advisors for tenders, except when expertise is required, for example for IT specification. Therefore a technical expertise was appointed to advise the IRBA on the tender for an IT service provider as follows;

1. Chrono-Logic Consulting
2. IT Tender
3. R3 507 232.90
4. R147 744.00

No other transaction advisors were appointed for tenders in the period 1 January 2012 to December 2016.

PFA

The OPFA did not appoint any transaction advisors for tenders in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

LAND BANK

For the period, 1 January 2012 to date the Land Bank engaged the services of consultants on the following two (2) occasions for assistance with the development of technical criteria of the specialised services referred to below:

1. Tender for Banking Services

  (i) Deloitte was appointed to advise on the technical criteria for the tender. The tender was managed by the Bank’s Procurement Division and evaluated by the Land Bank evaluation committee.

   (ii) Tender for Banking Services.

   (iii) The tender was awarded based on cash flow and financial projections with a net interest benefit of approximately R18 million to the Bank.

   (iv) Deloitte was paid a fee of R426 799 (excl VAT) for services rendered.

2. Tender for Asset Management Services for the Land Bank Insurance Company

   (i) Independent Actuaries & Consultants (Pty) Ltd (IAC).

   (ii) IAC was appointed to advise on the technical evaluation criteria for asset management services as the Land Bank and its Insurance subsidiary did not have the technical expertise to develop the criteria.

  (iii) At the time of rendering the services, IAC was contracted to the Land Bank Insurance Company for other actuarial services and offered to render their services in assisting with the development of the technical criteria pro bono. The only additional cost incurred for their services in terms of this tender was for flights that amounted to approximately R8000.

FAIS OMBUD

No transaction advisors for tenders were appointed in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

PIC

All corporate tenders of the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) are subject to the requirements of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) of 1999. The PIC diligently complies with the PFMA. The PIC has not appointed transaction advisors for its tenders for the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

SAA

1. BnP capital (Pty) Ltd were appointed as transaction advisors for the tender.
2. Financial Advisory Services tender.
3. The pricing for the tender was R2 689 830.00.
4. The transaction advisors were paid R0.00. The award was cancelled after the service provider’s FSB license was revoked and no payment was made to the service provider.

SARS

We wish to confirm that after looking into SARS Procurement, we do not have any records for the appointment of Transaction Advisors for tenders over the period in question.

SASRIA

Year	Advisor name	Services rendered	Advisor contract price	Tender	Total tender price
2013	SNOW Consultants Inc	Interior design, space planning, furniture design, consultant management, contract management & architectural documentation services	R454,910	New office interior fit-out (phase I)	R12.412,839
2014	SNOW Consultants	Interior design, space planning, furniture design, consultant management, contract management & architectural documentation services	R236,425	New office interior fit-out (Phase I)	R1,614,806
2015	SNOW Consultants	Interior design, space planning, furniture design, consultant management, contract management & architectural documentation services	R256,500	Office interior fit-out (Phase III)	R1,725,230
2016	Optiflex	Take part in and give input in the adjudication process for the IT architecture (enterprise development) Take part in an interview process	R2500 Per hour	Enterprise architecture Framework	N/A Tender not finalized
2015	Alexander Forbes	Investment consultancy	R47 549	Fixed Income Tender	Amount Based on Income %

TAX OMBUD

The Office of the Tax Ombud has not made any appointments of transaction advisors for tenders in the period 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016.

Reply:

(a-c) No.

Reply:

At the Board meeting of 30 September 2016 the Board was apprised of the immediate and short-term liquidity risks facing the company and also the short term facilities that were maturing in the ensuing 6 months from the time to the value of R4.3 billion. Working capital requirement was quantified to be R2.5 billion up to the end of that financial year end (March 2017). The breakdown of the maturity profile was as follows:

• R4 billion was maturing in December 2016 and
• R300 million was maturing in January 2017

The Board then approved that Finance Committee (“FINCO”) assist management in engaging with the Financial Institutions/ senior debt lenders in concluding a “package solution” that will allow the airline to manage liquidity.

Management together with FINCO convened a meeting with senior debt lenders and requested the lenders to participate in the new R2.5 billion working capital that the company required and also requested the lenders to extend the short term facilities that were maturing in FY17.

The lenders agreed to support SAA on terms and conditions that would be satisfactory to the lenders. Regarding the additional R2.5 billion for working capital, the lenders set milestones that needed to be fulfilled or met before a drawdown of each tranche (totalling to R2.5 billion). Therefore, the short-terms facilities of R4.3 billion plus R2.5 billion for working capital and R830 million facility which totals to R7.6 billion were then extended to 30 April 2017. The agreement with the lenders was to repay on the 30 April 2017 once the turnaround and business plans were done.

A letter to this effect was written by the Board informing the Minister of the liquidity status and short-term maturities. The Minister was also apprised of the mitigating plans that the Board undertook to deal with the liquidity constraints. The Board submitted a one-year corporate plan in March 2017 and included in it was the request for R10 billion allocation of capital and condonation of five-year corporate plan due to turnaround plan not being concluded. At the time of submitting the corporate plan management and the Board were aware that the 30 April 2017 repayments will not be met.

On 10 April 2017, SAA received a letter from Standard Chartered Bank (“SCB”) informing the company that SCB does not intend or will not extend further than 30 April 2017. Minister of Finance as the Shareholder was made aware of SCB’s decision. Engagements were held between SAA, NT and SCB and they further extended by 2 months up to 30 June 2017. The Board has been having numerous meetings weighing different options to try and mitigate the liquidity risk. The Board also wrote numerous communications to the Shareholder informing him of the liquidity status and the mitigating plans that the company is working on to ensure that the liquidity risk does not materialise (inability to debts as and when they are due)

The options that the Board was considering included but not limited to:

• Requesting recapitalisation from the shareholder
• Frequent engagements with NT and the lenders to ensure that all are apprised of the developments
• The Board had a strategy session and took a decision to appoint Restructuring Advisors to review the Long Term Turnaround Strategy (LTTS) that the company had to check if this was the correct strategy for the company and why the strategy did not yield the results that were anticipated
• The Restructuring Advisor was also going to assist management in compiling the five-year turnaround plan for the organisation
• Option of diversifying the investors or increasing the pool of investors
• There have been weekly meetings that have been set between SAA, NT and the lenders with the aim of keeping the lenders abreast of the developments in the company
• Debt consolidation process was initiated but unfortunately did not materialise

Current Status:

The Board has approved the five-year corporate plan and submitted to the Shareholder. The focus of the Board and management is the implementation of the turnaround plan.

Reply:

NATIONAL TREASURY

(a) No National Treasury officials were awarded a contract or agreement to conduct business with any state entity in the (i) 2014-15; (ii) 2015-16 or (iii) 2016-17 financial years.

ASB

None of the Accounting Standards Board’s staff members have declared any contract or agreement to conduct business with any state entity.

CBDA

No staff of the CBDA was awarded any contracts or agreements to conduct business with any state entity in the 20114-15 to 2016-17 financial years.

DBSA

DBSA is not covered by the Public Service ACT therefore matters of conflict of interest are managed in line with the DBSA Act and Board approved policies. The DBSA would also not have access to the government systems that can conduct searches on individuals that conduct business with the state.

The DBSA Board has an approved Conflict of Interest Policy which does not allow bank employees or their related parties to do business with the bank. The policy further requires employees to disclose any outside interests an employee may have. Any involvement in outside interests requires the approval of the employee’s manager after satisfying themselves that the interests do not conflict with the business of the Bank, does not affect the employee’s contractual obligations with the Bank, and that the employee will not use their position in the bank to solicit business from the Banks’ clients.

Employees are expected to disclose their interests on an annual basis or as and when there is a change in status. Non- compliance to the policy is monitored by the Ethics Officer and Internal Audit conducts an annual audit on the interests declared.

FSB

(b) Financial Services Board (FSB)

Based on the records maintained no staff member of the FSB were awarded any contracts or agreements with any state entity in (i) 2014-15, (ii) 2015-16 and (iii) 2016-17.

FIC

The FIC has found no information that any of its staff were awarded contracts or agreements in their personal capacity to conduct business with any state entity in the financial years as above.

However the FIC has established that two members of staff held interests as co-directors in companies which conducted business with the government departments.

a) (i) Ms P Magakwe (Application Support Analyst): Co-director in Yaquba Construction Projects which was contracted with Department of Public Works, Mpumalanga for construction work in 2014-15 to the value of R217,615.27.

b) (ii) Ms U. Ketsekile (Assistant Administrator): Co-director in Sizo Catering and Cleaning Services, which provided catering for two (2) FET Colleges and a hospital in Eastern Cape Province in 2016 to the value of R78,344.00

GEPF

The GEPF did not award any staff member any contracts or agreements to conduct business with any state entity and the financial years listed above.

GPAA

In terms of our Supply Chain Management and the Human Resources Management information, there are no contracts awarded to any staff member in (i) 2014-15, (ii) 2015-16 and (iii) 2016-17 financial years.

The (aa) (aaa) names and (bbb) professional designations of the staff members are not applicable as there is no contract that was awarded to staff, as referred to above.

The details of the contract(s) and/or agreement(s) awarded and (bbb) amounts in each of the above case are not applicable as there is no contract that was awarded to staff, as referred to above.

IRBA

1. Not applicable
2. Not applicable
3. Not applicable

PFA

No staff member of the OPFA was awarded any contracts or agreements to conduct business with any state entity in the (i) 2014-15, (ii) 2015-16 and (iii) 2016-17 financial years.

LAND BANK

Below are the Land Bank employees who have been awarded contracts by the State:

Last name	First name	Position	Companies	Awards	Details (Nature of contract)	Date Awarded
Chaane	Kabelo	Senior Specialist: Workout & Restructure	Baapo Consulting (50% shareholder)	R 245 000.00	Ditobetla Local Municipality - Fencing of cemetery (MIG/NW2274/CF/16/17)	2016
Mokoena	Herbert	Sales Consultant	Bright Idea Projects 2496 (Pty) LTD	None	Department of Agriculture and Local Municipalities: Vending and Agri-products supplier	2011- 2014
Rakgalakane	Adam	Managing Director: Land Bank Insurance Company	Rakgalakane Investments Kefelesi Trading	Not applicable – Not in the employ of the State	Various State Department	2014-2015 Joined Bank Insurance (10/08/2016)
			Kefelesi Trading	Not applicable - Not in the employ of the State	Department of Agriculture & Rural Development	2015-2016 Joined Bank Insurance (10/08/2016)
			Woodcreation Rakgalakane Investment JV	Not applicable - Not in the employ of the State	City of Tshwane: Award 22/02/2016 Tshwane House – Manufacture and Fitting of Furniture – Tsela Tshweu Construction JV	22/02/2016 Joined Bank Insurance (10/08/2016)
			Rakgalakane Investments Financial Interest – 45% but 100% family Owned Management involvement – 0% Board Involvement - Quarterly	R36 million – 200 million (3 year contract estimated demand)	National Treasury Transversal Contract (17/11/2016) RT11-2016: Supply & Delivery of Animal Feed to the state – period 01 October 2016 to 30 September 2019	2016/2017 Joined Bank Insurance (10/08/2016)
Ramonedi	Mulalo	Business Analyst: I.T	Rexizone (member of closed corporation – company since in process of deregistration)	R85 000.00	National / Provincial Department of Safety 5 Day Event Catering: Once off	2015
Phoku	Mumsy	Team Administrator – Internal Audit	Mamphiwa Projects	R4125.00	Department of Water Affairs - Catering	2014
			Mamphiwa Projects	R27 000.00	Department of Water Affairs – Trolley Bags	2014
			Mamphiwa Projects	R24 000.00	Air Force - Printers	2016
			Mamphiwa Projects	R92 428.98	Air Force – Partitioning	2016
			Mamphiwa Projects	R25 048.00	Air Force – Venetian Blinds	2016

FAIS OMBUD

1. No contracts or agreements awarded
2. No contracts or agreements awarded
3. No contracts or agreements awarded

PIC

The Public Investment Corporation (PIC) circulates a Declaration of Interest form annually, requesting staff members to declare their business interests. Nothing from the completed forms in our possession suggests that any of our staff members have been awarded any contracts or agreements to conduct business with any state entity.

SAA

SAA Employees are required to sign the annual declaration interest in terms of the Conflict of Interest Policy. Furthermore every bidder/prospective supplier completes and sign an SBD 4 (Declaration of Interest Form) with every submission of a tender.

Based on the policies and the controls in place, SAA has not awarded contracts nor have agreements to conduct business to any of its staff in the 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 financial years. The annual statutory by the external auditors (Auditor-General South Africa) has also not identified any such instances.

SARS

The Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), in 2014, enacted the Public Administration Management Act, No: 11 of 2014 (PAMA, 2014). The Act prohibits public service employees from doing business with an organ of the State or being a director of a company which conducts business with an organ of the State. In order to give effect to PAMA, 2014, the Minister for the Public Service and Administration issued the Public Service Regulation, 2016 (PSR, 2016) with effect from the 01 August 2016.

In terms of Regulation 13 (c) of the Public Service Regulations, 2016 public service employees are prohibited from conducting business with an organ of state. Prior to the Regulations coming into effect, public servants were not prohibited from doing business with the State and thus not required to disclose if they are doing business with the State.

	Year	Number of employees	Contract details	Values (sum)
			No. employees	Expiration
(I)	2014/15	13	2	2014/15 (Resigned from SARS)	R 15 989 238.82
			1	2018 (permission granted)
			7	2014/15 (resigned from company/ contract expired)
			1	2016 (No proof)
			2*	Spouse’s contracts
(II)	2015/16	5	3	2015/16 (resigned from company/ contract expired)	R 2 592 373.25
			2*	Spouse’s contracts
(III)	2016/17	20	15	2016/17 (resigned from company/ contract expired)	R 5 298 910.00
			3	2020 (Permission granted)
			2	2016/17 (No proof)

(aa) (aaa) Due to the confidential nature of some of the information requested and our legislative obligation to the protection of personal information governed by the Protection of Personal Information Act, SARS is prohibited from disclosing any employee specific information that may include names of individuals, job specific information, etc.

(bb) (aaa) Please see the response above at (aa) (aaa).

SASRIA

No, not to our knowledge, as per the declaration of interests submitted each year by all staff members.

TAX OMBUD

None of the staff in the Office of the Tax Ombud was awarded contracts or agreements to conduct business with any state entity in the 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016017 financial years.

Reply:

1. (a) I was not the Minister of Finance on the 10th of March 2017,

(b) Yes, the statement was authorised by the Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service.

2. Not applicable.

Reply:

1. Minister of Finance has three advisors, and are;

1. Prof. Chris Malikane – Economic Advisor. National Treasury still working on his contact.
2. Adv Kholeka Gcaleka – Legal Advisor. Remuneration per annum R 1, 463,892.00 – level 15;
3. Mr Thamsanqa Msomi – Political Advisor. Remuneration per annum R1,318,993.00 – level 15.

Their identity numbers cannot be given for security reasons.

2. As indicated above.

Reply:

(a-b) No.

Reply:

The position on virtual or crypto-currencies is that they are currently not regulated (they operate without the authority of central banks). An alert to this effect was issued jointly by the National Treasury, the South African Reserve Bank (SARB), the Financial Services Board (FSB), the South African Revenue Service (SARS) and the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) on 18 September 2014 (attached Annexure A - available on www.treasury.gov.za), which cautioned members of the public to be aware of the risks associated with the use of virtual currencies for either transactions or investment. As noted, the relevant authorities continue to monitor and assess the use of virtual currencies and consult with private sector stakeholders in this regard. Further guidance or regulations may be issued, should the need arise.

While the above position still applies, the National Treasury together with the SARB, FIC, and FSB have also established an Intergovernmental Fintech Working Group in December 2016, to develop an approach and potential revised policy stance towards fintech, including crypto-currencies, and to deal with fast-emerging fintech matters in the financial sector, like crowdfunding, robo-advice, machine learning and alternate payment platforms. A balanced approach is being taken, which is supportive of the objectives of enhanced innovation, competition and financial inclusion in the financial sector, while also reviewing risks related to financial customer protection, money laundering and financial stability.

Reply:

1. The table link below indicates the number of aircraft in SAA fleet, models thereof and years in service. The domestic network is serviced by the narrow-bodies and international network by the wide-bodies. All aircraft in SAA fleet are operable.

https://pmg.org.za/files/RNW1947TABLE-170720.pdf

2. The aircraft have adequate range and capacity to meet the SAA Network demand. The biggest challenge on the wide body fleet is that SAA still operates the A340 fleet, which on average are now 12 years old. These four-engines aircraft are expensive to operate and maintain.

3. SAA currently has some spare capacity in wide-body (long range) aircraft. This is due to the entry of the 5x A330-300 new aircraft. However, SAA will have to return 2x A340-600s at the end of lease in July and August 2017), at which time some of the excess wide-body capacity will be removed.

Reply:

NATIONAL TREASURY

Minister and DM don’t use security services.

ASB

The CEO of the Accounting Standards Board does not make use of security services paid for by the State or the entity for the CEO, her immediate family or any of their staff members.

CBDA

The Co-operative Banks Development Agency’s Managing Director did not make use of security services paid for by the State for him / herself, his / her immediate family members or any of their staff members at any stage.

DBSA

No

FSB

c) Financial Services Board

(i) No, with regard to the Executive Officer.

(ii) No.

(iii) No.

(aa) Not applicable.

(bb) Not applicable.

(cc) Not applicable.

FIC

FIC does not make use of any security services paid for by the state for the head of the FIC or his immediate family of any other staff member of the FIC.

GEPF

The GEPF did not make use of any security services paid for by the State.

GPAA

• No, the head of the GPAA has never used security services paid for by the state; neither have his immediate family members and staff members.
• (aa) is not applicable because of the above.
• (bb) and (cc) are not applicable because of bullet one.

IRBA

The IRBA hereby declares that;

(i) Not application

PFA

1. No
2. No
3. No

LAND BANK

1. Ther is no Land Bank staff member who using the security services paid for the State.
2. No immediate family member of any Land Bank employee is using such a service.
3. No staff member.

FAIS OMBUD

1. No
2. No
3. No

PIC

The Chief Executive Officer of the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) and his immediate family members do not use security services paid for by the State or the PIC.

SAA

There is no use of security services paid for by the State or SAA for the acting CEO, his / her immediate family or any of their members.

SARS

Does (a) he, (b) his Deputy Minister or (c) any of the heads of entities or bodies reporting to him make use of security services paid for by the State for (i) him/herself,

Security services at SARS are paid for by SARS and not by the state. Only threat and risk assessments are borne by SAPS as part of police services.

(i) SARS is a critical institution tasked with revenue collection. Due to the nature of its mandate it is vital that the Commissioner and some SARS employees, who by virtue of their roles, who are threatened or deemed to be threatened by individuals or syndicates under investigation, are provided with personal protectors. The current Commissioner including previous SARS Commissioners have all been allocated protective service for this reason.

The Commissioner of the South African Revenue Service, Mr Tom Moyane does have Protective Service Officers allocated to him.

(ii) his/her immediate family members

(ii) The Commissioner’s spouse is allocated Protective Service Officers, as has been practise at SARS. The protectors of family members are allocated in line with previous practice at SARS.

iii) Any of their staff members; in each case (aa) what are the reasons for it, (bb) from which department or entity’s budget is the security services being paid, and (cc) what are the relevant details?

(iii) The above applies to those employees in SARS, who based on a threat and risk assessment, receive protection.

(aa) The relevant details in respect of Protective Service Officers (PSO) vary from individual to individual of those being protected by the threat and risk assessment (TRA) which is compiled in advance by South African Police Service.

Divulging the number protectors allocated to the Commissioner will be a breach of security measures currently in place.

(bb) SARS budgets for security service for SARS employees.

(cc) Divulging the relevant details would compromise security measures in place.

The entire SARS environment is audited on an annual basis by the Auditor General.

SASRIA

Sasria SOC Ltd does not make use of security services paid for by the state for any of its personnel.

TAX OMBUD

The Office of the Tax Ombud did not make use of security services paid for by the State for himself/herself, his/her immediate family members nor any of its staff members, in each case there was no need for such services, no provision was made in the budget for such service, and no amount was paid, and no relevant details.

Reply:

a) SAA has not made any financial contribution to the legal or other representations of Ms. Dudu Myeni regarding the compliance notice issued by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission against Ms Dudu Myeni and/or Companies Tribunal hearing to consider or review application by her.

b) SAA has not made any other contribution to the legal or other representations of Ms. Dudu Myeni regarding the compliance notice issued by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission against Ms Dudu Myeni and/or Companies Tribunal hearing to consider or review application by her

Reply:

a) The Fund is currently fully funded.

b) There is therefore no action required from the Minister.

Reply:

1. No.

2. (a)The Minister has not as yet appointed any new Board member, except the appointment of the Deputy Minister of Finance who automatically becomes a member of the Board as a result of the Cabinet decision taken on 03 December 2008 where the Cabinet approved;

• the ex-officio appointment of the Deputy Minister, as non-executive director to the Board of the PIC; and

• that should a Deputy Minister of Finance vacate his or her office, the new incumbent will automatically serve on the Board of the Public Investment Corporation Limited.

(b) In terms of the PIC Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI), the Board of the PIC shall comprise of 15 directors of which 2 should be the executive directors (the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer). Currently the Board comprises of 13 directors (2 executive directors and 11 non-executive directors). The Minister is currently reviewing the 2 proposed candidates submitted by the Board to fill the two vacancies. As required by the PIC MOI which states that the Minister shall in consultation with Cabinet appoint the directors of the PIC, the Cabinet memorandum will be submitted to the Cabinet as soon as the Minister finalises the appointment process.

3. No.

 

Reply:

The Department of Public Enterprises has clear guidelines for the appointments of Board members and as such, a rigorous process was followed. As for me, I never met him until he was a Board member and then at Board meetings he attended, at which I may have been present.

Reply:

Yes. Official department meetings, policy documents, investigation and internal audit reports are not publicly available and are archived in secured common network drives as well as on the SharePoint platform based E-registry. Annual reports and Auditor-General’s reports are regarded as publicly available records and are published on the National Treasury website (www.treasury.gov.za). A need to know principle, in terms of the approved organisational Information Sensitivity Policy is applied to determine the required level of access and to restrict unnecessary access to records by members of staff.

For members of the public, access to records, that are not publicly available, may be requested from the Information Officer in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA). To access such records, a request for information which clearly describes the record(s) being requested must be submitted by completing the prescribed “form A” which must be forwarded to the following e-mail address: [email protected]. The form may also be hand delivered to the National Treasury Building in 240 Madiba Street, Pretoria or mailed to Private Bag X 115, Pretoria 0001.

Reply:

a (i) FINDINGS

The findings made by the National Treasury cover transgressions in terms of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) of 1999 and the Central Energy Fund Act (CEF Act) of 1997. In addition, the National Treasury found a number of procedural discrepancies in how the transaction was executed. It should be noted that these findings were communicated to the previous Minister of Energy (MoE) as well as to the current Minister of Energy, Ms Mmamoloko Kubayi. The findings in relation to Section 54 (d) of the PFMA, the CEF Act and various procedural discrepancies noted in the information provided to the National Treasury are as follows:

Section 54 (d) of the PFMA:

Section 54 notification in terms of the PFMA was required. Specifically, Section 54 (d) of the PFMA which deals with the acquisition or disposal of a significant asset. In determining the significance of the asset sold, direction was taken from the CEF group’s significance and materiality framework (SMF) for the period 1 April 2015 to March 2016. In terms of the group SMF, the SFF would have to report to the CEF Board for any transaction in excess of 2% of its total assets (i.e. R135 million), furthermore the CEF Board would have had to obtain approval from the MoE and notify the National Treasury for all transactions in excess of 5% of profit after tax or R713 million. The proceeds realised, even on an individual contract basis exceed the specified threshold. The National Treasury was not informed of the transaction.

Central Energy Fund Act of 1977:

Additional approvals are required in terms of the CEF Act. Section 1A(3A) of the CEF Act states that “There shall be paid into the Equalisation Fund, in addition to the moneys raised by means of a levy” (c) “the moneys obtained by CEF Proprietary Limited or the SFF Association from the sale of crude oil, petroleum products and products determined by the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance”

Deviations permitted in terms of the CEF Act are:

• Moneys paid into the equalisation fund that are not immediately required may be invested. In terms of Section 1A(4(b)) moneys can be invested “in such a manner as the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance may determine”; and

• In terms of Section 1A(5), the Minister of Mineral and Energy Affairs with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance determines that an amount paid in terms of 1A(3A)(c) shall be paid into the State Revenue Fund.

The proceeds of the sale of the crude stocks was paid into the Customer Foreign Currency Account (CFCA), an investment account, and not into the equalisation fund held by the Central Energy Fund. This was done without the concurrence of the Minister of Finance, the CEF Act makes no provision to regularise this after the fact.

Procedural Discrepancies

There are a number of procedural discrepancies in how the transaction was undertaken. Inter alia, it appears that there were conditions set by the Board of the SFF and the former Minister of Energy which do not appear to have been met, based on the information. Moreover, the authority of the Acting Chief Executive Officer (ACEO) (Sibusiso Gumede) of the SFF to execute the transactions (which appear to have been retrospectively approved by the SFF Board) needs to be verified. The National Treasury was not able to make categorical findings on the procedural discrepancies as it did appear that not all the information related to the transaction was provided to the National Treasury.

a (ii) RECOMMENDATIONS

The former Minister of Finance wrote to the former Minister of Energy with the following recommendations:

The matters are of concern and should be investigated by the Executive Authority. Specifically, section 83 (1)(a) of the PFMA states that “The accounting authority for a public entity commits an act of financial misconduct if that accounting authority wilfully or negligently fails to comply with a requirement of Section 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 or 55”. Section 83 (2) states that “If the accounting authority is a board or other body consisting of members, every member is individually and severally liable for any financial misconduct of the accounting authority”. Section 83 (4) further states that “Financial misconduct is a ground for dismissal or suspension of, or other sanction against, a member or person referred to in subsection (2) or (3) despite any other legislation”. Regulation 33 of the Treasury Regulations deals with financial misconduct.

Furthermore, the former Minister of Finance proposed that the SFF be instructed to submit a PFMA Section 54 (d) notification to the National Treasury and provide reasons for the oversight in the first instance. In addition that the entity pay the proceeds of the disposal into the equalisation fund as is legislatively required by 30 September 2016.

In the event that the proceeds of the sale were not immediately and were to be invested then in line with Section 1A(4b) of the CEF Act, then supporting information was to have been submitted to the Minister of Finance for his consideration.

No response was received.

Subsequent to this correspondence, Minister Kubayi was appointed as the Minister of Energy and correspondence was sent from the Minister of Finance stating the following:

In addition to restating the findings of the National Treasury communicated to the former Minister of Energy, the following was requested:

• According to a press statement issued by the former Minister of Energy in July 2016, a review was to be conducted on all contracts and transactions entered into in terms of a Ministerial Directive issued to the SFF. The review would include the transaction involving the disposal of the strategic stock and the leasing agreements entered into by the SFF. The statement further advised that any identified lapse in governance processes or irregular actions would be further investigated. These actions appear to be in line with the requirements of Section 83 of the PFMA.

• The proceeds from the sale has not been paid into the Equalisation Fund as is legislatively required and as per the initial correspondence. The deadline set by the former Minister of Finance of 30 September 2016 was not adhered to. In addition, there has been no communication regarding a proposal for the investment of the proceeds of the funds from the disposal.

• The Minister of Finance further requested an update of the current status of the review that was referred to in a press statement issued in July 2016 by the former Minister of Energy and the status of the proceeds from the sale. No response has been received.

b. The National Treasury was never requested to table its findings in parliament, but is willing to do so if requested. However, it should be noted that the Department of Energy is currently investigating the matter and the National Treasury has afforded the department the opportunity to respond to the findings of the National Treasury pending the outcome of its investigations.

Reply:

Government has since 2011 stepped up its retirement reform programme and the aim of such reform is to ensure that we maximise and protect the interest of all retirement funds and their members. The reform aims to protect the funds and their members from high and opaque charges, poor governance and poor investment decisions or approaches that can benefit more the industry and not members. This process is ongoing and impacts on both State and private retirement funds.

In the 2013 Budget, as part of our retirement reform proposals, the National Treasury indicated the importance of bringing all public sector retirement funds under the purview of the Pension Funds Act (“PFA”), subject to financial feasibility. This approach would enable uniform regulation and supervision under the Financial Services Board, and access to free dispute resolution institutions like the Pension Funds Adjudicator for members of such public sector retirement funds.

There are a few State pension funds that fall outside of the PFA, these are the Government Employees Pension Fund (“GEPF”), Transport Pension Fund, Transnet Retirement Fund, Transnet Second Defined Benefit Fund, Post Office Pension Fund and Telkom Pension Fund. Of these, only the GEPF falls directly under the Ministry of Finance. The other public sector funds fall under the ambit of the Ministers of Transport, Telecommunications and Postal Services, and Public Enterprises, even though the Minister of Finance does have an indirect role regarding any decisions that may have financial implications. However, all these State funds that are not covered by the PFA generally have a Board (of trustees), whose duty it is to protect the members and the fund.

With the exception of GEPF and Transnet, Telkom and the Post Office have also established Defined Contribution retirement funds that are registered under the PFA, while the ‘old’ (Defined Benefit) funds are closed to new members. This means that the main challenge with protecting retirement funds remains with funds that fall outside the PFA.

Reply:

(1-2) No.

Reply:

(1-2) No.

Reply:

(1-2) He has since gone through government policy induction in order to align his academic life to the role of Minister of Finance. Therefore his utterance will be aligned with government policies henceforth, bearing in mind that one of the key features of a democracy is freedom of expression. Of course, this must be exercised in a responsible manner taking due regard of the position that such person holds.

3. No statement will be made.

Reply:

My predecessor would have been best suited to respond to the question asked.

Reply:

(1) Yes, I have gazetted the dates for the coming into operation of most clauses in the Act, and our plans to facilitate implementation of the Act. Together with the Government Notice No. 563 in Gazette No. 40916, now technically amended by the attached Notice No. 601 in Gazette No. 40939, published on Tuesday, 13 June 2017, the National Treasury issued the attached Press Statement informing the public that I have signed and gazetted the implementation of the Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Act of 2017 (“the FICA Act”). The Press Statement was accompanied with more detailed information in the following attached documents:

(i) Government Notice containing the two commencement dates of 13 June 2017 and 2 October 2017 for most of the provisions in the Act. I expect the remaining provisions to be in operation no later than 1 April 2018. These provisions relate to the freezing of assets related to UN Security Council decisions and to private companies doing business with Government. They require some preparatory work before they can be implemented.

(ii) A roadmap document, titled “Roadmap for the Implementation of the Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Act, 2017 (Act No. 1 of 2017) for supervisors and accountable institutions”.

This important document (also) details the various FICA Act provisions and their categories which took effect on 13 June 2017, those taking effect on 2 October 2017, and lastly those intended to take effect (or full effect) after 2 October 2017 (which I expect to be no later than 1 April 2018) (see pages 3 to 9). This document also contains timelines on various actions which must be undertaken from June to December 2017 (see page 12).

(iii) A high-level National Treasury document, for public consultation, titled “A new approach to combat money laundering and terrorist financing”.

This document sets out the vision and strategy on the implementation of the new risk-based approach and a more consultative and consumer-friendly approach in relation to regulatory and policy issues like financial inclusion and the approach towards Prominent Influential Persons.

(iv) Draft Government Notices, for public consultation, on withdrawal of exemptions and amendments to the Regulations, and Draft Guidance, also for public consultation, from the Financial Intelligence Centre, providing draft guidance on how the new measures contained in the FICA Act can be implemented.

(2)(a) Please refer to the attached commencement Notice, Press Statement and the roadmap document on commencement dates, which provide more detailed information.

(2)(b)(i) The provisions of the FICA Act will apply to all accountable institutions. There is, though, an acknowledgement that not all of them will be in the same state of readiness; for example, the banks, by being at the centre of facilitating (legitimate) financial flows and combating illicit financial flows, are or will likely be more ready than other institutions.

(2)(b)(ii) The only two outstanding areas, namely on freezing of assets and prominent influential persons in the private sector would be implemented and operationalised, respectively, no later than 1 April 2018, though I hope it is even sooner. These relate to sections 17, 20, 21(b) and 39 of the FICA Act and paragraph (b) of the list of domestic prominent influential persons in Schedule 3A, inserted by section 59 of the FICA Act, requiring a Ministerial notice to set a threshold. These provisions require consultations within Government, systems upgrades by both supervisors and / or accountable institutions, including the ability to generate appropriate databases on or develop systems capability to search persons doing business with Government above a certain rand value threshold.

(2)(c) No later than 1 April 2018, or hopefully sooner if all processes can be concluded faster.

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii)

The total amount used on the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) is as below:

Sector	Sphere	Expenditure (R )
Environment and Culture	Municipal	649,266,609
Environment and Culture	National	1,944,187,518
Environment and Culture	Provincial	368,493,033
Infrastructure	Municipal	4,029,605,703
Infrastructure	National	326,981,581
Infrastructure	Provincial	6,027,079,241
Non-State	National	2,141,622,424
Social	Municipal	432,463,456
Social	National	74,909,152
Social	Provincial	1,754,409,150
Total	17,749,017,866

Questions (b) and (c) should be redirected to the Department of Public Works as the EPWP is within their mandate.

Reply:

(1)   (a) (b) and (c) (i, ii and iii).

Given the Department’s responsibility in terms of Section 14 of the Constitution which protects the applicant’s right to privacy, the Department is unable to share the details as requested above. The Department however does acknowledge the requirements stipulated in Section 195 of the Constitution stating that state institutions are accountable to Parliament.

(2) (i) Director-General: 37 applicants,

(ii) Chief Procurement Officer: 78 applicants; and

(iii) Head of Government Technical Advisory Centre: 71 applicants.

Reply:

1. The Commissioner of SARS has received a final report on 09 June 2017; the title of the report is “The South African Revenue Service. Final Report. Investigation into allegations contained in the FICA report : MJ Makwakwa and KA Elskie”

2. Given that the process is still ongoing, we are at this stage unable to provide a determination of costs in this regard.

(3) Minister will not be making any statement on the matter at this point.

Reply:

DETAILS OF THE PROGRESS MADE TOWARDS THE APPOINTMENT OF A CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR SAA

A head hunter was appointed in December 2016

• The position was advertised in the local newspapers as well as in the industry magazine during December 2016 and January 2017. Furthermore, an active domestic and international head hunting process was embarked upon.
• Eleven candidates were short listed. Of the eleven, six were South African and five were internationals.
• The first set of interviews was held during the month of March, having concluded the CFO appointment process during the month of February.
• Five candidates were shortlisted, two South Africans and three internationals.
• The second set of interviews was supposed to commence towards the end of March and conclude by the middle of April, given that the dead-line of the end of April had been set by the Board.
• The time-line was delayed due to an uncontrollable situation.
• The interviews are now scheduled for the 13th and the 20th of May 2017.

(a) List of applicants, and (b) the curriculum vitae for each applicant

• It would be a breach of confidentiality to disclose and circulate the names and cv’s of the candidates who have applied for the position. Once a shortlist of three candidates has been determined, these will be shared with the Board and submitted to the Shareholder Representative, the National Treasury, for the finalisation of the process.

(c) Anticipated appointment date

• All things being equal, the top three candidates will be presented to the SAA Board in the week of the 22nd of May, where after, this list will be submitted to the Shareholder Representative, the National Treasury, by the end of that week, i.e. by the 26th of May.
• We are not able to determine how long the Shareholder Representative processes will take in bringing this matter to a conclusion.

Reply:

(1) Yes, South African Airways had sponsorship commitments in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15, (c) 2015-16 and (d) 2016-17. All these sponsorship sponsorships were approved in accordance with the company’s DOA requirements and followed internal approval process. The sponsorships for the above period are listed in the table below:

Sponsorship Property	Right Holder	Value	Period
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5m per annum	2013-14
SA Olympic Teams	SASCOC	R6m per annum	2014-15
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5m per annum	2014-15
SA Olympic Teams	SASCOC	R6m per annum	2015-16
Springboks	SA Rugby	R22.5 per annun	2015-16
Miss South Africa	Sun International	R594k	2015-16
World Routes	UBM	R1.5m	2015-16
NBA Africa Games	NBA Africa	R1.3m	2015-16
International Jazz Extravaganza	Teacup Projects Proprietary Limited	R1.1m	2015-16
Bafana Bafana	SAFA	R10m first year R25m per annum thereafter	2016 – 17
SA Olympic Teams	SASCOC	R8m per annum	2016-17
Miss South Africa	Sun International	R596k	2016-17

Notes:

• The SA Rugby sponsorship ended on 31 December 2015.
• The SASCOC sponsorship ended in March 2017
• The SAFA sponsorship for BAFANA BAFANA is a five (5) year agreement that started in April 2016 and ends on 31 March 2021.
• All SAA sponsorships are offered strictly on a Value-In-Kind (VIK) basis. This means the value of the tickets offered and there is no outlay of cash for sponsorship
• The sponsored parties are liable for airport taxes

(2) the details/declarations are included above.

 

Reply:

Legal Background/Basis

(a) (i) The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (Systems Act), 2000 gives power to municipalities in terms of section 75A to “levy and recover fees, charges or tariffs in respect of any function or service of the municipality”. To give effect to this power, municipalities are required to adopt and implement a tariff policy on the levying of fees for municipal services in terms of section 74 of the Systems Act.

A municipal tariff is defined as: “fees necessary to cover the actual cost associated with rendering a municipal service, and includes-

• bulk purchasing costs in respect of water and electricity reticulation services, and other municipal services;
• overhead operation and maintenance costs;

• capital costs;

• a reasonable rate of return, if authorized by a regulator of or the Minister responsible for that municipal service;”.

The determination and approval of municipal tariffs is done by the municipality in terms of section 75A of the Systems Act but subject to the norms and standards prescribed by relevant national legislation.

The National Treasury only provides inputs / comments on the proposed bulk pricing structure to the organ of state (in this case Water Boards) that is responsible for the provision of such resource (in this case water) to the municipality in terms of section 42 of the Municipal Finance Management Act.

(ii) The National Treasury issues a municipal budget circulars to guide municipalities on the preparation of their Medium Term Revenue and Expenditure Framework (MTREF). Given the drought conditions that were experienced in the country, Circular 85, advised municipalities to ensure that any drought penalty tariffs must be provided for in their tariff policy to be tabled in March 2017 and also to consider incorporating the penalty tariffs in the Inclining Block Tariff (IBT) structure.

(b) The National Treasury does not confirm water tariff increases but provides guidance to municipalities on structuring of their tariffs.

 

Reply:

National Treasury

1. (i) None
2. (ii) N/A

ASB

The Accounting Standards Board has not procured any services or made any payments to a certain company (name furnished), nor any other public relations firm. The Accounting Standards Board has had no need to procure such services.

CBDA

CBDA did not procure any services with a certain company (name furnished) or any public relations firm due to budget constraints. Exposure is gained through direct contact with the communities we serve as well as our annual Indaba.

DBSA

(b) (i) NO

(b) (ii) YES – for 2015/16 we procured the services of HKLM Exchange (Pty) Ltd

(aa) Public Relations and creative design services for the Annual Report and media planning for the launch of the annual financial results.

(bb) Total cost of R1, 036,000.

(cc) breakdown of the costs were R939, 000 for the annual report and R97, 000 for the media and PR services for the launch of the results.

(dd) Total amount paid was R1,036,000.

(ee) The payment was for the services procured with respect to public relations and creative design for the Annual Report and media planning for the launch of the annual financial results.

(ff) Breakdown of the costs were R939, 000 for the annual report and R97, 000 for the media and PR services for the launch of the results.

FIC

The FIC has not made use of a certain company (name furnished) or and other public relations firm as there was never such a requirement.

FSB

1. …..
2. (i) No payments have been made by the Financial Services Board (FSB) to a certain company (name furnished).

(ii) The public relations consultant engaged by the FSB is Gillian Gamsy International Communications (GGI).

(aa) professional assistance with media releases as and when required and media monitoring.

(bb) 2015/2016 R114 427,50

2016/2017 R718 356,75

Total R832 784,25

(cc) See (bb) above.

(dd) See (bb) above.

(ee) See (aa) above.

(ff) See (bb) above.

GEPF

i The GEPF did not procure any services nor made any payments to a certain company (name furnished) and does not intend to procure any of their services in the future.

ii The GEPF did not procure any service nor made any payments to any public relations firm in the 2016/17 financial year.

GPAA

1. No services were procured from a certain company (name furnished); and
2. No services were procured from any other public relations firms;

The GPAA was never in demand of any of these services.

IRBA

No services were procured from a certain company (name furnished) and no payments were made. No services were procured and no payments were made to any other public relations firms.

IRBA does not use services of Public Relations Firms.

PFA

No payment was made, and no requirement for related services from the service provider.

No payments made to any other public relations firm due to the nature and size of the entity. Public relations are managed internally through a stakeholder management program.

LAND BANK

1. The Land Bank never procured any services from a certain company (name furnished). This company is not listed in the procurement database of the Land Bank as a vendor.
2. The Land Bank did procure the services of Magna Carta - a public relations firm.

(aa) The following services were procured:

• Brand and reputation management and strategy;
• Brand repositioning and brand building;
• Internal and external communications plan with all the stakeholders;
• Internal and external communications plan execution (including content preparation);
• Team preparation for communication roll out;
• Organisational Review Project Communication Management Support;
• Media Monitoring Services;
• Embedded Resource; and
• Annual Report Publication

(bb) The total cost for the contract was: R1, 288,200.00 (VAT included). Period

of the contract was from 1 September 2015 up until 30 September 2016.

(cc) The cost breakdown is as follows:

• Brand and reputation management and strategy, Brand repositioning and brand building: R102,600.00;
• Internal and external communications plan with all the stakeholders: R102,600.00;
• Internal and external communications plan execution (including content preparation): R239, 400.00;
• Team preparation for communication roll out: R68,400.00;
• Organisational Review Project Communication Management Support: R102,600.00;
• Media Monitoring Services: R171, 000.00;
• Embedded Resource: R461,700.00; and
• Annual Report Publication: R39,900.00

(dd) The total cost for the contract was: R1, 288,200.00 (VAT included). Period

of the contract was from 1 September 2015 up until 30 September 2016.

(ee) The following services were procured:

• Brand and reputation management and strategy;
• Brand repositioning and brand building;
• Internal and external communications plan with all the stakeholders;
• Internal and external communications plan execution (including content preparation);
• Team preparation for communication roll out;
• Organisational Review Project Communication Management Support;
• Media Monitoring Services;
• Embedded Resource; and
• Annual Report Publication

(ff) The cost breakdown is as follows:

• Brand and reputation management and strategy, Brand repositioning and brand building: R102,600.00;
• Internal and external communications plan with all the stakeholders: R102,600.00;
• Internal and external communications plan execution (including content preparation): R239, 400.00;
• Team preparation for communication roll out: R68,400.00;
• Organisational Review Project Communication Management Support: R102,600.00;
• Media Monitoring Services: R171, 000.00;
• Embedded Resource: R461,700.00; and
• Annual Report Publication: R39,900.00

FAIS OMBUD

No services procured from and/or made any payments to a certain company (name furnished).

No services procured from and/or made any payments to other public relations firms. The entity did not require the services of a public relations firm.

PIC

The Public Investment Corporation (PIC) has never procured any services from or made any payments to a certain company (name furnished) is not registered on the PIC’s procurement database. The PIC used the services of The Communications Firm (TCF) in 2011 to organise and publicise its centenary celebrations, including expo and dinner. It has also used TCF in subsequent years for marketing collateral as well as for English writing enhancement services; and the total cost for all these services was R 2,842,983.54, broken down as follows:

Item	Amount Paid
PIC Centenary celebrations	R 2,323,989.17
Marketing Collateral	R 507,684.41
English writing enhancement services	R 11,309.96

SAA

1. SAA has not procured any services from and/or made any payments to a certain company (name furnished).
2. SAA has procured the services of PR Powerhouse Public Relations and details are as follows:

(aa) Provision of Public Relations Services

(bb) R96 900 per month (including VAT), for five months

(cc) Copy writing; Media relations; Briefing and Status meetings; Communication Services

(dd) R484 900 paid as per contract

(ee) Provision of Public Relations Services

(ff) As at (cc) above SAA has procured the service

SARS

SARS does not have this certain company (name furnished) as a vendor on its system and has not contracted any Public Relations firms for the financial years 2015/16 and 2016/17.

SASRIA

No.

TAX OMBUD

The Office of the Tax Ombud did not procure any services from or made any payments to a certain company (name furnished) or any other public relations firms, no services were procured by the Office of the Tax Ombud.

 

Reply:

The South African Revenue Service is, in terms of the provisions of Chapter 6 of the Tax Administration Act, bound to treat all taxpayers’ affairs as confidential and may not divulge any aspects pertaining to the affairs of any taxpayer.

The Commissioner can therefore not divulge any details relating to this matter.

Reply:

The South African Revenue Service is, in terms of the provisions of Chapter 6 of the Tax Administration Act, bound to treat all taxpayers’ affairs as confidential and may not divulge any aspects pertaining to the affairs of any taxpayer.

The Commissioner can therefore not divulge any details relating to this matter.

Reply:

In June 2016, the National Treasury met with various officials within the Department of Energy (DoE), the Central Energy Fund (CEF) and the Strategic Fuel Fund (SFF). This meeting was held subsequent to the National Treasury learning of the disposal of the strategic oil reserves by the SFF with a view of understanding the details of what had occurred.

Following the meeting, the SFF committed to submitting to the National Treasury all documentation relating to the disposal process. The National Treasury reviewed the documentation in order to ascertain the legality of the process followed in accordance with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and the Central Energy Fund Act of 1977.

The National Treasury completed its review and reported its findings and recommendations to the former Minister of Energy in August 2016. No response has been received to date. The former Minister of Energy instituted an investigation into the stock disposal process, however, the findings of the investigation have not been reported to the National Treasury.

Reply:

The FIC refers information in its possession for investigation to law enforcement agencies pursuant to its primary objectives and functions as defined in section 3 and 4 of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 38 of 2001, as amended, with the aim of identifying proceeds of crime, combatting money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

The FIC does not refer cases of acts of criminality for investigation. Rather in terms of Section 40 of the Act, it refers packages of transactional and other information that present indicators of suspected criminality to be investigated by the competent authorities. It is for these authorities to determine if the transactions are indeed proceeds of crime, or may be associated with an unlawful predicate offence.

The FIC has recorded the information sought from 2012 onwards and which is set out below.

(a) Between 1 April 2012 till 31 March 2017 the FIC referred 87 matters for investigation by the competent authorities for them to determine if the transactions reported are proceeds of crime or connected to an unlawful predicate offence involving acts of corruption as defined by the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, Act 12 of 2004 (PRECCA) legislation.

The FIC made the following referrals related to suspected acts of corruption and for which statistics have been kept in the financial years:

2012/2013: 9

2013/2014: 8

2014/2015: 6

2015/2016: 40

2016/2017: 24

Total: 87 referrals.

(b) The FIC does not have information available regarding which of these matters have been investigated by the competent authorities or have resulted in a conviction.

Reply:

No. Government has not investigated the possibility of using the Government Employees’ Pension Fund (GEPF) through the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) as a possible public entity partner for SA Airways (SAA) as one option in Government’s review of SAA’s long term turnaround strategy.

The Minister of Finance announced in the Budget Speech on 24 February 2016 that he, together with the Minister of Public Enterprises had “agreed to explore the possible merger of South African Airways and South African Express, under a strengthened board, with a view to engaging a potential minority equity partner, and to create a bigger and more operationally efficient airline”. The Study undertaken by Bain and Abacus in this regard has been completed and the next steps are for the National Treasury and the Department of Public Enterprises to review the options and recommendations to allow an informed decision to be taken on how to proceed.

The PIC does not hold equity investments in State Owned Companies (SOCs). However, the PIC, on behalf of its clients, does hold a substantial amount of bonds of various SOCs. A significant portion of the PIC's bond-holdings in SOCs is government guaranteed. Importantly, SOCs have never defaulted on any of the PIC's bond investments. The PIC undertakes all investment decisions in the best interest of its pensioners and clients and in line with client mandate requirements and the investment risk parameters stipulated by client mandates. The continued support of SOCs by PIC will be underpinned by these mandate requirements. Moreover, all investments are also subject to a robust due diligence process which includes a credit analysis, Environmental, Social and Governance report as well as risk and legal reports.

The aim of the PIC remains to safeguard pensions of public servants and ensure that reasonable returns are generated for contributors.

Reply:

National Treasury

(a)(i) None

(a)(ii) N/A

(a)(ii)(aa) N/A

(a)(ii)(bb) N/A

(a)(ii)(cc) N/A

(a)(ii)(dd) N/A

(a)(ii)(ee) N/A

(a)(ii)(ff) N/A

 

ASB

The Accounting Standards Board has not procured any services or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

CBDA

The CBDA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

DBSA

The DBSA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

FIC

FIC has not procured any services from or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

FSB

FSB has not procured any services from or made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

GEPF

GEPF did not procure any services nor made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation and does not intend to procure any of their services in the future.

GPAA

The GPAA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

IRBA

The IRBA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

PFA

The PFA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

LAND BANK

The Land Bank has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

FAIS OMBUD

The FAIS Ombud has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

PIC

The PIC has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

SAA

The SAA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

SARS

The South African Revenue Service (SARS) has not procured services from the Decolonisation Foundation and does not have the supplier registered on its database.

SARS procures goods and services in line with its mandate in compliance with the PFMA, National Treasury Regulations, Preferential Procurement Regulations, respective National Treasury Practice Notes and guidelines as well as internal policies and procedures. The position going forward is that SARS conducts its procurement activities in line with the provisions of Section 217 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Accordingly SARS is compelled to consider and fairly evaluate any proposal received through a duly constituted procurement process from a bona fide vendor. 

SASRIA

The SASRIA has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

TAX OMBUD

The Office of the Tax Ombud has not procured any services from Decolonisation Foundation, and no payments were made to Decolonisation Foundation.

Reply:

There are various Bills proposing the establishment of public entities which are currently being considered by Parliament and Provincial Legislatures. The following public entities are currently being proposed in Bills before Parliament:

• National Public Health Institute of South Africa
• Waste Management Bureau
• Wine Certification Authority
• Border Management Authority
• Financial Sector Conduct Authority
• Ombud Council (Financial sector)

a) The above Bills are still under consideration before the different legislatures, the establishment of these entities and their functions are therefore proposals.

b) If the enabling legislation is enacted, the National Treasury or relevant Provincial Treasury will engage in discussions with the relevant department concerned, to assess the appropriate level of funding to be allocated to the public entity, in line with its legislated functions.

 

 

Reply:

1.A detailed list is attached in response to (a) – (g), for all National Treasury employees as at 8 May 2017.

2. (a) Total number of persons employed as at 31 March 2017 is 1168.

(b) Total number of persons employed as at 8 May 2017, 1164. (Annexure A attached) [confidential]