Questions and Replies

Filter by year

24 May 2016 - NW683

Profile picture: Shinn, Ms MR

Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Communications

(1)(a) Which set-top box providers have been involved in the production of set top boxes (STBs) to the (i) Northern Cape and (ii) Free State up until 29 February 2016, (b) how many STBs has each company provided in each case? and (c) what amount has each company been paid up until the specified date for services rendered; (2) whether all of the STBs produced by the specified companies are Direct-to-Home STBs; if not, how many of the STBs produced are Digital Terrestrial Television STBs?

Reply:

(1) (a) Universal Service and Aceess Agency of South Africa (USAASA), has informed me that it has appointed three companies (BUA Africa, CZ Electronics and Leratadima) to produce and supply set-top boxes to the South African Post Offices accross the country, including the Northern Cape and the Free State.

(b) USAASA informed me that the companies provided STBs as follows:

(i) Northern Cape: BUA Africa provided 3,506 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 27,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 150 STBs.

(ii) Free State: BUA Africa provided 1,400 STBs; CZ Electronics provided 16,000 STBs; and Leratadima provided 00 STBs.

(c) USAASA further informed me that BUA Africa did not receive any payments as their invoices came in late. Leratadima and CZ Electronics were paid R680,934.34 and R35,841,674.00 respectively.

(2)  According to the Agency, not all produced STBs are Digital Terrestrial Television: 3,506 are DTH STBs and 27,150 are DTT STBs.

                                                                         

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

24 May 2016 - NW1399

Profile picture: Stander, Ms T

Stander, Ms T to ask the Minister of Labour

Whether (a) her department and (b) all entities reporting to her are running developmental programmes for (i) small businesses and Yes (ii) co-operatives; Yes if not, why not, if so, in each case (aa) what are the relevant details, (bb) what amount has been budgeted and (cc) how many jobs will be created through the specified development programmes in the 2016-17 financial year?

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii) Yes, Productivity South Africa does run developmental programmes for Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), and Cooperatives.

(aa) The entity has developed action learning solutions to assist SMMEs and Cooperatives aimed at equipping them with the right skills, knowledge and attitudes to implement systems and procedures to improve productivity, profitability, growth and employment creation within these sectors.

The details of the program are as follows:

  1. PHASE 1: Business Start-up Workshop (BSUW)

The objective of this phase is to cultivate productive behaviour and distribute productivity competencies among emerging entrepreneurs, including SMMEs and co-operatives. They are enabled to achieve the following learning outcomes:

  • Demonstrate an understanding of productivity and its measurement.
  • Define entrepreneurship and the characteristics of a successful entrepreneur.
  • Demonstrate an understanding of business compliance.
  • Identify sources of start-up capital.
  • Demonstrate an understanding of the business plan guide/ template as a tool during implementation of action plans to establish a business.

    2. PHASE 2: Business Performance Improvement Workshop (BPIW)

The objective of this phase is to apply an action learning solution to assist SMMEs and co-operatives to implement systems and procedures that will result in:

  • Wastage elimination
  • Increased sales
  • Reduced operational costs through speed and quality improvement
  • Maximised profits
  • An early warning system (EWS) to proactively detect distress.
  1. PHASE 3: After-care and Coaching

The third phase of the programme assist delegates with practical assignments relevant to their own businesses in the form of coaching aftercare services. The practical implementation of the programme content facilitates the achievement of the following objectives:

  • The assumption of entrepreneurial behaviour
  • The ability to calculate basic productivity measurements
  • The ability to establish and maintain critical business practices, such as cash-flow management, budgeting and inventory control
  • Practical measurement of current productivity levels and setting of achievable improvement targets
  • The ability to undertake practical productivity improvement projects based on set targets
  • The ability to realise tangible financial savings from productivity improvement projects and improving profitability and growth.

The coaching component is applied throughout the programme as practical improvement projects are presented. Productivity advisors align activities according to the requirements of the group/cluster. The programme is concluded with a comprehensive stakeholder close-out report and entrepreneurs who complete their portfolio of evidence receive certification.

(bb) An amount of R6 277 116.00 has been budgeted for the 2016/17 financial year for this program.

(cc) A total 1 200 SMMEs and 4 300 Cooperatives will be assisted.

 

24 May 2016 - NW1151

Profile picture: Mncwango, Mr MA

Mncwango, Mr MA to ask the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

With regard to the soldiers deployed in KwaZulu-Natal game parks (details furnished), what amount has been spent by her department in the past 10 years for the protection of rhinos in all the game parks, including uniforms, food, training, housing, transport, health, vehicles and weaponry?

Reply:

Soldiers of the SANDF are not deployed in in the KZN game parks per se but are responsible for border safeguarding operations. Amongst other, along the KZN-Mozambican borders therefore there is no financial implications related to the above mentioned question, only OP CORONA budget is spent for border safeguarding.

24 May 2016 - NW1300

Profile picture: Cardo, Dr MJ

Cardo, Dr MJ to ask the Minister of Economic Development

What (a) political and (b) commercial considerations led the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) to strike a restructuring deal with a certain company at a reduced interest rate of prime plus 2% given that the specified company defaulted on its first R250 billion loan to the IDC?

Reply:

I have been furnished with a statement by the CEO of the Industrial Development Corporation, Mr Geoffrey Qhena, on the matters covered by the question.

The statement by the IDC follows:

“(A) There were no political considerations associated with the restructure;

(B) The restructuring was done purely on commercial terms as set out below;

(C) Point of correction – the amount is R250 million and not R250 billion.

The original R250 million loan is expected to be fully repaid, as R137,5 million has already being received to date and R112,5 million is outstanding as at 30 April 2016. The next instalment of R37,5 million is payable by end of June 2016, with intention of the full capital being repaid by 31 March 2018.

The interest of R257 million being from 14 April 2010 to 31 May 2014 (the date on which the amount converted was determined) was converted into shares when the entity was listed (at a 10% discount to the listing price).

The additional interest (after conversion) of prime plus 2% will be repaid as a lump sum on 31 March 2018.

The risk profile of the company at the time of our initial investment compared to the risk profile of the company at the time of restructuring differed materially. At the time of the acquisition, the mine was under care and maintenance and the company was not generating any revenue which needed to be brought back into production.  The turnaround strategy of the company was based on an improvement in operational efficiencies and productivity. The IDC initially viewed the asset as a pure uranium play (the gold potential was not considered at the time due to level of accuracy of the information) compared to the time of restructuring, there was a demonstrable open cast gold reserve with a proven operational record. At the time of the acquisition, the “perceived” risks were higher, hence the equity type return of 10% Real After Tax Internal Rate of Return (RATIRR).

Our pricing mechanism always takes into account both the level of risk and developmental impact and the repayment profile mirrors the anticipated cash flow generation of the asset/project.

At the time of the restructuring, IDC demanded that the company part settle R100 million of the original facility before the restructuring of the facility. In addition the main shareholder had injected an additional R293 million and the company was generating positive cash flows from the gold production concomitant with now a demonstrable operational track record from the gold production. Moreover, the IDC facility was reduced by R100 million and the balance of the original capital continued to be secured by the assets of the company, giving the IDC a security cover of more than one times – hence the prime plus two percent post the restructuring. It is not the first time that the IDC has done a restructuring of this nature where a debt facility is converted into equity. Ordinarily both the interest and capital is converted into equity. The difference in this instance is that only the interest portion was converted retaining the capital for it to still be repaid thus putting us in a better position.”

MG Qhena, 23 May 2016

-END-

24 May 2016 - NW1411

Profile picture: Motau, Mr SC

Motau, Mr SC to ask the Minister of State Security

Whether (a) his department and (b) all entities reporting to him are running development programmes for (i) small businesses and (ii) co-operatives; if not, why not; if so, in each case, (aa) what are the relevant details, (bb) what amount has been budgeted and (cc) how many jobs will be created through the specified development programmes in the 2016-17 financial year?

Reply:

The State Security Agency (SSA) does not have development programmes for SMME’s or Cooperatives.

24 May 2016 - NW1237

Profile picture: Grootboom, Mr GA

Grootboom, Mr GA to ask the MINISTER OF ARTS AND CULTURE

(1) Whether the National Film and Video Foundation (NFVF) has regional offices in each province; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) Whether the NFVF has any relationships and/or liaisons with international film companies currently filming in South Africa; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (3) Whether there are any policies governing the specified liaisons between the NFVF and international film companies; if not, why not; if so, will he furnish (a) Dr G A Grootboom and/or (b) the Portfolio Committee on Arts and Culture with copies of the specified policies?

Reply:

1. The NFVF currently does not have any regional offices. The main reason is budgetary – the NFVF Act allows for a 25% cap on administration expenditure and the setting up of regional offices would cause NFVF to vastly exceed this cap and reduce funds available to offer as grants.

2. The NFVF does not enter into agreements with individual international companies. However, the NFVF has agreements with official international state entities. South Africa has signed 8 international co-production treaties with the governments of Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Germany, France, Australia and New Zealand. We are currently in negotiation with Brazil, Algeria, Kenya and Netherlands to sign treaties with these countries.

Co-production treaties are signed in order for government entities (such as NFVF) in both countries to facilitate and encourage production and cultural exchange between the respective countries. These co-production treaties are administered by the NFVF.

3. The co-production treaties that has been signed with the 8 above-mentioned countries govern the relationship between South Africa and the respective countries. Please find attached copies of the 8 treaties signed between the government of South Africa and the government of the respective countries.

24 May 2016 - NW1278

Profile picture: Marais, Mr S

Marais, Mr S to ask the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

With reference to her reply to question 395 on 15 March 2016, (a) how many burglaries from the Military Police Service facilities were reported at either (i) the Military Police Service station and/or (ii) the SA Police Service in the (aa) 2012-13, (bb) 2013-14 and (cc) 2014-15 financial years and (b) what was the (i) nature of the stolen goods in each case and (ii) monetary worth of such losses as determined by the SA National Defence Force?

Reply:

(a) Burglary cases reported

   (i) Military Police Service Stations – Three cases of burglary were reported.

(aa) 2012-13: One case of burglary at haba Tshwane Military Police Area Office (MPAO) and one burglary at Daquar MPAO.

(bb) 2013-14: No burglary was reported.

(cc) 2014- 15: One case of burglary at Bloemfontein MPAO

(b) Nature of stolen goods is TV, two edge cutters.

TV (Thaba Tshwane) R6,000.00

2x edge cutters (Daquar) R5,000.00

Forced entry (Bloemfontein – nothing stolen)

There were no cases reported to the South African Police Service

24 May 2016 - NW684

Profile picture: Shinn, Ms MR

Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Communications

(a) Which companies have been providing the antennae for the set-top box roll-out in the (i) Northern Cape and (ii) Free State up until 29 February 2016 (b) how many antennae has each specified company provided to date? and (c) what amount has each specified company been paid to date?

Reply:

(a) The Universal Service and Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA), which is the entity charged with the responsibility of managing the procurement of set-top boxes, informed me that Ellies Industries, Temic Manufacturing and QEC Pty Ltd are the three companies appointed to provide DTT antennas in the Northern Cape and Free State as at 29 February 2016.

(b) The entity has informed me that Ellies Industries provided 15,680 DTH Antennas, Temic Manufacturing provided 9,640 DTT Antennas, and QEC Pty Ltd provided 3,100 DTT antennas.

(c) USAASA informed me that an amount of R8,834,200.00 was paid to Ellies Industries. QEC and Temic Manufacturing were paid R17,770.32 and R27,018.00 respectively.

 

MR NN MUNZHELELE

DIRECTOR GENERAL [ACTING]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE:

MS AF MUTHAMBI (MP)

MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS

DATE

24 May 2016 - NW1528

Profile picture: Cardo, Dr MJ

Cardo, Dr MJ to ask the Minister of State Security

Whether his department was approached by any political party for any form of funding (a) in the (i) 2013-14, (ii) 2014-15 and (iii) 2015-16 financial years and (b) since 1 April 2016; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (2) Whether his department provided any form of funding to any political party (a) in the (i) 2013-14, (ii) 2014-15 and (iii) 2015-16; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

Reply:

The State Security Agency (SSA) does not fund any political parties.

24 May 2016 - NW373

Profile picture: Groenewald, Mr HB

Groenewald, Mr HB to ask the Minister of Labour

(a) With reference to President Jacob G Zuma’s undertaking in his State of the Nation Address delivered on 12 February 2015, that the Government will set aside 30% of appropriate categories of state procurement for purchasing from Small, Medium and Micro-sized Enterprises (SMMEs), co-operatives, as well as township and rural enterprises, what percentage of the total procurement of (a) her department and (b) every entity reporting to her went to (i) SMMEs and (ii) co-operatives from 1 April 2015 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

Reply:

1. The Department of Labour’s spent on SMMEs for 2015/16 accounted for 59.2% of the total procurement spent.

2. When taking all its entities into account, 29.6% accounted for SMMEs procurement.

3. Cooperatives accounted for negligible share and the Labour Activation Programme is focusing on Enterprise Development Programme with a special focus on Cooperatives.

24 May 2016 - NW1256

Profile picture: Bagraim, Mr M

Bagraim, Mr M to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture,

Whether he has undertaken any international trips on government business to (a) the French Republic and/or the (b) the Republic of Senegal in the 2015-16 financial year; if so, (i) where did he go in each case and (ii) what was the reason for each specified trip? NW1404E

Reply:

I did not undertake an international trip on government business to either the French Republic and/ or the Republic of Senegal in the 2015 -16 financial years.

24 May 2016 - NW1299

Profile picture: Cardo, Dr MJ

Cardo, Dr MJ to ask the Minister of Economic Development

Whether any member of the Industrial Development Corporation’s executive team has ever (a) met with any (i) member, (ii) employee and/or (iii) close associate of the Gupta family and/or (b) attended any meeting with the specified family (i) at the Gupta’s Saxonwold estate or (ii) anywhere else since taking office; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each specified case, (aa) what are the names of the persons who were present at each meeting, (bb)(aaa) when and (bbb) where did each specified meeting take place and (cc) what was the purpose of each specified meeting?

Reply:

I have been furnished with a statement by the CEO of the Industrial Development Corporation, Mr Geoffrey Qhena, on the matters covered by the question.

The statement follows:

“It is common knowledge that the IDC has provided financial assistance to Oakbay Resources & Energy Limited. In the period leading up to the finalisation of negotiations regarding the transaction and in the normal course of business, Mr Ufikile Khumalo (who was at the time the Divisional Executive responsible for Mining and Beneficiation) and Mr Abel Malinga (the current Divisional Executive responsible for Mining & Metals Industries) held several meetings with officials, executives and shareholders of Oakbay Resources & Energy including Mr Atul Gupta and Mr Jagdish Parekh. All meetings with officials, executives and shareholders of Oakbay Resources took place at the offices of the IDC. None of these meetings took place at the Gupta’s Saxonwold Estate.

In addition to the meetings referred to above and during the course of the last year, the current Divisional Executive for Mining and Metals Industries, Mr Abel Malinga met twice with the Chief Operating Officer (COO) of Oakbay Resources, Ms Ronica Ragavan, to finalise the terms for restructuring Oakbay Resources’ existing facilities with the IDC. The second meeting discussed a possible early redemption of IDC facilities by Oakbay Resources. The meeting to discuss the restructuring of Oakbay Resources facilities took place at the IDC whilst the discussion on possible early redemption of IDC facilities by Oakbay Resources took place at the client’s offices at 144 Katherine Street, Sandton.”

MG Qhena, 11 May 2016

-end-

24 May 2016 - NW850

Profile picture: Mashabela, Ms N

Mashabela, Ms N to ask the Minister of Basic Education

Whether she has taken any steps to address the challenge in the Amathole region in the Eastern Cape Province, since being notified that teachers at Seymour High School are not teaching learners since schools open in January 2016; if not, why not; if so; which steps has she taken?

Reply:

The National Department of Basic Education contacted the Eastern Cape Education Department to seek clarity on the matter as we could not find a Seymour High School in the Amathole region on the national database. The Eastern Cape Department indicated that there is no Seymour High School in the Amathole but Seymour Primary School, located in the Fort Beaufort district. The province and the district were not aware of any disruptions at Seymour Primary School – a school that had been visited by district officials at the beginning of the year to assess readiness for the 2016 academic year. The principal of Seymour Primary School has also sent in a written response indicating that the school has operated normally since the opening of schools on 11 January 2016, and no disruptions have been experienced at the school. The response from Seymour Primary School attached (Annexure A)

24 May 2016 - NW1236

Profile picture: Grootboom, Mr GA

Grootboom, Mr GA to ask the Minister of Arts and Culture

HOW MANY TRIPS DID OFFICIALS FROM HIS DEPARTMENT UNDERTAKE TO INTERNATION FILM FESTIVALS IN THE (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16 FINANCIAL YEARS, (b) HOW MUCH DID EACH SPECIFIED TRIP COST, (c) HOW MANY ARTISTS ACCOMPANIED HIS DEPARTMENT’S OFFICIALS ON THE SPECIFIED TRIPS AND (d) HOW DID FILM PRODUCERS BENEFIT FROM THE SPECIFIED TRIPS?

Reply:

Year & Festival

(a) Number of trips by officials of the department

(c) Number of artists accompanying officials on the specific trips

(b) Estimated costs – actual costs are being collected from financial records and will be supplied as soon as available

(d) How did film producers benefit from the specific trips

2011/12

FISAHARA Film Festival in Tindouf in Algeria

  • 1 trip
  • 3 artists
  • Estimated costs R600 000 -

Actual costs being obtained

The work of SA film producers was showcased

2012/13

FISAHARA Film Festival in Tindouf in Algeria

  • 1 trip
  • 4 artists
  • Estimated costs R650 000

Actual costs being obtained

  • The work of SA film producers was showcased

2013/14:

FISAHARA Film Festival in Tindouf in Algeria

Cannes Film Festival in France

  • 1 trip
  • 1 trip
  • 11 artists

None

  • Estimated costs R800 000
  • Actual costs being obtained
  • Estimated costs was R814 180.00.

Actual costs being obtained

  • The work of SA film producers was showcased
  • The work of SA film producers was showcased.

Signing film coproduction treaties allow SA film producers to access partnerships, access co-financing, to coproduce, and access distribution, exhibition and marketing opportunities.

2014/15

FISAHARA Film Festival in Tindouf in Algeria

  • 1 trip
  • 2 artist
  • Estimated costs R400 000 -

Actual costs being obtained

  • The work of SA film producers was showcased

2 FISAHARA Film Festival in Tindouf in Algeria 015/16

  • 1 trip
  • 1 artist
  • Estimated costs R400 000 -

Actual costs being obtained

  • The work of SA film producers was showcased

24 May 2016 - NW1234

Profile picture: McLoughlin, Mr AR

McLoughlin, Mr AR to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation

(1)Whether, with reference to particular key commitments undertaken by her as a consequence of the assessment of her department by the Auditor-General in the 2014-15 financial year, the focus risk assessment has been discussed by her department’s top management; if not, why not; if so, (a)(i) when and (ii) where did such discussions take place, (b) who was present during the specified discussions and (c) what was the outcome of the discussions; (2) whetherher department’s audit committee produce a report on its monitoring of the risk assessment; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will this take place; (3) whether, with reference to the specified commitments, a structure incorporating the sanitation function has been established; if not, why not; if so, what (a) is the name of the specified structure, (b) are the full relevant details of the terms of reference of the specified structure, (c) sanitation-related work has the specified structure undertaken to date and (d) were the outcomes in each case; (4) whether, with reference to the specified commitments, a joint team comprising her department, the Auditor-General of South Africa and the National Treasury has met to commence its work towards addressing issues of concern; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) My Department's Top Management discussed the Auditor-General (AG)’s report on the following dates, refer below:

  • 13 October 2014;
  • 23 February 2015; and
  • 23 March 2015.

Furthermore the Risk Management Committee also discussed the AG's report on 13 October 2014.

(1)(a)(ii) The meeting took place in Pretoria.

(1)(b) The meeting was attended by members of Top Management and Risk Management.

(1)(c) The outcomes of the discussions was to mitigate risks as identified by the AG and to continue to improve the internal control environment.

(2) My Department’s audit committee report has been included in the annual report for 2014/15 financial year.

(3) No, the structure of the sanitation function remains as transferred from the Department of Human Settlements. The organisational structure of my Department is currently being reviewed in its entirety.

(4) A Steering Committee functions within my Department and is attended by Top Management, Internal Control, AG and National Treasury, which worked in tandem to resolve the issues raised during the AG Audit.

---00O00---

24 May 2016 - NW1096

Profile picture: Boshoff, Ms SH

Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education

How many online registrations by educators were received by the SA Council for Educators in each (a) province and (b) district in the (i) 2012-13, (ii) 2013-14 and (iii) 2014-15 financial years?

Reply:

According to the South African Council for Educators (SACE) Annual Performance Plan, educators were registered as follows, both on-and off-line:

2013/14: 25 315

2014/15: 26 000

2015/16: 20 000 educators were targeted for registration.

The online system is being piloted from April to June 2016. Data will then be available.

 

24 May 2016 - NW426

Profile picture: Boshoff, Ms SH

Boshoff, Ms SH to ask the Minister of Basic Education

(1)How many sign language teachers are currently appropriately trained to teach sign language in the (a) foundation, (b) intermediate, (c) senior and (d) Further Education and Training phases of the education system; (2) (a) what are the names of schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments and (b) how many of the appropriately trained teachers are deployed to teach at the specified schools in each province; (3) (a) how many full service schools are catering for learners with hearing impairments, (b) what are the names of the schools and (c) how many appropriately trained teachers are deployed at each of the specified schools in each province; (4) what steps are being taken to bridge the gap caused by shortages for appropriately trained sign language teachers?

Reply:

1. (a), (b), (c) and (d). The table below shows the number of appropriately trained sign language teachers at Foundation, Intermediate, Senior and Further Education and Training Phases in each province.

Province

  1. Foundation Phase
  1. Intermediate Phase

(c)Senior Phase

(d)Further Education and Training Phase

Total

Eastern Cape

35

22

26

16

99

Free State

16

2

3

3

24

Gauteng

11

10

11

1

33

KwaZulu-Natal

       

31

Limpopo

26

20

22

17

85

Mpumalanga

13

9

No school catering for FET

22

North West

12

11

2

0

25

Northern Cape

4

3(7)

3(6)

2(5)

12(18)

Western Cape

7

5

5

5

22

Source: Provincial reporting

2. (a) and (b). The table below shows the names of schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers in specified schools in each province.

Province

(a) School

(b) Number of Teachers

Eastern Cape

Efata

35

 

St Thomas

28

 

Reubin Birin

21

 

Sive

15

Totals

4

99

Free State

Bartimea Special School

13

 

Thiboloha Special School

11 (2 specialist teachers teaching sign language as a subject.

TOTAL

2

24

Gauteng

Dominican

9 (7)

 

Filadelfia

2(4)

 

Katlehong School for the Deaf

6(7)

 

MC Kharbai

4(4)

 

Sizwile

5(3)

 

St Vincent

4(3)

 

Transoranje

3(3)

Totals

7

33(31)

KwaZulu-Natal

Fulton School for the Deaf

2 (4) assistants in brackets.

 

KwaThintwa School for the Deaf

2(6)

 

VN Naik School for the Deaf

3(4)

 

Durban School for the Deaf

3(4)

 

KwaVulindlebe School for the Deaf

0(5)

 

Indaleni School for the Deaf

1(7)

 

Vuleka School for the Deaf

7(5)

 

St Martin de Porres

8(2)

 

Bumbisizwe Special School

1(2)

 

Inkanyezi Special School

2(1)

 

Inkanyiso Special School

0(1)

TOTAL

11

29(43)

Limpopo

Setotolwane

34

 

Yingisani

17

 

Bosele

15

 

Tshilidzini

15

 

Sedibeng

4

TOTAL

5

85

Mpumalanga

Kamagugu

6

 

Silindokuhle

12

 

Bukhosibetfu

4

 

Marietjie

2

 

Wolvenkop

3

TOTAL

5

27

Northern Cape

Retlamelang

12

TOTAL

1

12

Western Cape

   
 

De la Bat

80% 0f teachers in the schools completed SASL linguistic training university level

 

Nuwe Hoop

 
 

Dominican Wittebome

 
 

Mary Kihn

 
 

Noluthando School

 
     

Source: Provincial reporting

(3) (a)(b)(c). The table below shows the number and names full service schools catering for learners with hearing impairments; and the number of appropriately trained teachers deployed at each school. Only the Free State and Mpumalanga have Full Service Schools that cater for learners with hearing impairments.

  1. Number of Schools; And (b) Names of schools
  1. Number of appropriately trained teachers

Free State

Botle ba Thuto P/S

  • No teachers appropriately trained
  • Teachers and parents of learners who are identified with hearing impairments were provided with strategies on how to support these learners

Jagersfontein I/S

 

Mofulatshepe P/S

 

Oranjekrag I/S

 

Zama P/S

 

Christiaan de Wet I/S (Ordinary School)

 

Gelukwaarts IF/S

 

Hermana P/S

 

Jim Fouche P/S

 

Mabela P/S

 

Maboloka P/S

 

Pontsheng P/S

 

Dieketseng P/S

 

Hlaboloha P/S

 

Kegomoditswe

 

Winburg C/S

 

Kweetsa P/S

 

Letsibolo P/s

 

Malebaleba P/S

 

Ntuthuzelo P/S

 

Refihletse P/S

 

Reseamohetse P/S

 

Thoriso P/S

 

Chris van Niekerk I/S

 

JJ Kubheka P/S

 

Ntshwephepa P/S

 

Poelamo P/S

 

Sentrale Volkskool P/S

 

Theha Setjhaba P/S

 

Lesoana P/S

 

Letlotlo P/S

 

Mafube P/S

 

Leifo Iziko I/S

 

Mphatlalatsane P/S

 

Masaleng P/S

 

Pulamadiboho P/S

 

Qhubeka P/S

 

Sekgothadi P/S

 

Theboho P/s

 

TOTAL= 41 SCHOOLS

 

MPUMALANGA

Bukihosibetfu Full Service School

4

TOTAL= 1 SCHOOL

 

Source: Provincial reporting

(4) The following are the steps taken to bridge the gap caused by shortages for appropriately trained sign language teachers in each province.

Eastern Cape

The Eastern Cape Department of Education has entered into a partnership with the Education and Training Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA) to train all educators in four Schools for the Deaf. The EDTP SETA has in turn, contracted University of Witwatersrand (WITS) to train educators in two workshops of five days per year in 2014 and 2015. The partnership with Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) continues in the 2016/17 until all educators in these schools are qualified to teach Sign Language.

Free State

Teachers at Bartimea and Thiboloha Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing were trained on the South African Sign Language (SASL) Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) at Home Language level. Teachers were also trained on sign language as a means of communication.

Gauteng

  • Continuous SASL competency training takes place.
  • Currently all teachers teaching SASL as a subject have NQF Level 5.
  • All SASL teachers have deaf class assistants to compliment the language skill and to adopt the team teaching approach;
  • Collaboration with Wits Centre for Deaf Studies to assist with Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) for SASL, focusing on prose and poetry.

KwaZulu-Natal

The Inclusive Education Directorate has arranged with ETDP SETA to fund SASL training and the up-skilling of teachers from the above-mentioned schools. ETDP SETA has secured the services of the Wits Language School to undertake the training, assessment and certification of teachers. In the current training cohort, there are six (6) District officials and fifty seven (57) teachers receiving training in SASL. The training programme which extends over 15 days commenced in December 2015 and will continue in March-April 2016.

Mpumalanga

  • There is ongoing orientation of stakeholders on the approved SASL CAPS which includes, Curriculum Implementers (CIs), School Management Teams (SMTs), Deaf Teacher Assistants and educators;
  • The Education department of Mpumalanga is providing training of teachers, Language Subject Advisors and Deaf teacher assistants on SASL;
  • 45 teachers have to date been trained on NQF Level 4 and 5;
  • 60 Foundation Phase Language Subject Advisors and Inclusive Education officials have been trained on the basics of SASL; and
  • For the financial year 2015/16, 60 teachers will be trained on NQF Level 4 and 5 by the University of Free State. The training will take place from 25 February to 12 March 2016.

Limpopo

All teachers teaching learners with hearing impairments have been trained on basic SASL and further advanced training at the University (Advanced Diploma) level is planned for the future.

Western Cape

18 educators are being trained on SASL through the ETDPSETA by the University of Witwatersrand. Of the number given eight (8) are doing the advance level. In 2014 to 2015; thirty four (34) educators and officials were trained on SASL. The training on SASL will continue annually for all the educators.

24 May 2016 - NW1271

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation

(1)What is the water level of the Lomati Dam which supplies water to Barberton in the Umjindi Local Municipality in Mpumalanga as at 30 April 2016; (2) whether (a) the specified municipality and/or (b) any other (i) national and/or (ii) provincial department have asked her department for any form of drought-relief assistance as at 30 April 2016; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (3) what steps, if any, are (a) her department and/or (b) any other (i) national and/or (ii) provincial department taking to mitigate the effects of the low water levels of the Lomati Dam?

Reply:

(1) The Lomati dam is currently empty. The town of Barberton is now served from the natural surface water flow of the Qeensriver through the Suidkaap Water Treatment Plant. The Suidkaap WTP has been non-operational for almost 10 years and in mitigation of the water situation within the town my Department through Municipal Water Infrastructure Grant (MWIG) allocated R34 million for the resuscitation of the plant, and phase 1 which included the refurbishment of the 4.8Ml Water Treatment Work is complete and was commissioned in August 2015. Phase 2 is concentrating an additional clear water storage and replacement of 5km asbestos rising main pipeline and is due for completion in June 2016.

(2) The Umjindi Municipality has requested DWS for assistance with drought relief intervention. To date my Department has provided Barberton with a 80 kilolitre water storage tank to improve the water storage capacity of the Municipality. In addition to the tank the DWS is funding further civil engineering works at the Suidkaap Water Treatment Plant as alluded to above. These include two concrete water storage reservoirs. A budget of R66 million has been allocated to Umjindi through MWIG and DWS is also facilitating reprioritisation of funding towards refurbishment of eight boreholes within Barberton to improve the water security for the community.

(3) My Department is rolling out implementation of water restriction to regulate the level of water utilisation within the Catchment of the Lomati River. This is aimed at improving the flow levels in the river and ultimately improvement of the dam level.

---00O00---

24 May 2016 - NW1189

Profile picture: Bhanga, Mr BM

Bhanga, Mr BM to ask the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

(a) What is the total number of water leakages that were (i) reported and (ii) fixed in each metropolitan municipality since 1 July 2015, (b) how many litres of water were lost due to the specified leakages in each case and (c) what was each metropolitan municipality’s average response time to fix the specified water leakages?

Reply:

According to the information received from the Metropolitan Municipalities,

(a) The total number of leakages that were (i) reported and (ii) fixed since 1 July 2015 are indicated below:

Buffalo City: leakages reported 1 928 and fixed 1 928;

City of Cape Town: leakages reported 27 500 and fixed 27 500;

City of Johannesburg: leakages reported 22 431 and fixed 22 408;

City of Tshwane: leakages reported 61 000 and fixed 56 000;

Ekurhuleni: leakages reported 31 857 and fixed 31 850;

eThekwini: leakages reported 104 960 and fixed 103 176;

Manguang: leakages reported 16 976 and fixed 13 442;

Nelson Mandela Bay: leakages reported 8 014 and fixed 8 014.

(b) The litres of water that were lost due to leakages since 1 July 2015:

Buffalo City: not measured;

City of Cape Town: 2 978 Million Litres;

City of Johannesburg: 11 531 Million Litres;

City of Tshwane: 64 000 Million Litres;

Ekurhuleni: 41 880 Million Litres;

eThekwini: 279 Million Litres per Day; (approximately 2,511 million)

Manguang: 3,658 Million Litres per Day; (approximately 32,922 million)

Nelson Mandela Bay: 34 000 Million Litres.

(c) The average response time to fix the leakages are:

Buffalo City: 3 hours;

City of Cape Town: less than 24 hours;

City of Johannesburg: 32 hours;

City of Tshwane: 48 hours;

Ekurhuleni: 47 hours;

eThekwini: 1 to 2 working days;

Manguang: 3 working days;

Nelson Mandela Bay: 4 hours.

24 May 2016 - NW1279

Profile picture: Marais, Mr S

Marais, Mr S to ask the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

(1) Whether, with reference to her reply to question 4116 on 8 December 2015, she has finalised the appointment of Regular Force Military Judges yet; if not, (a) when will the vetting process for the specified judges be finalised and (b) by when will the specified judges be appointed; if so, what are the relevant details;

Reply:

  1. Vetting has been completed. Judges will be appointed before the end of May 2016.
  2. The Military Discipline Bill has recently received pre-certification from the State Law Advisers and this marks the way for the introduction of the Bill into Parliament. The Bill once passed will go a long way towards strengthening the military justice system.

24 May 2016 - NW1367

Profile picture: McLoughlin, Mr AR

McLoughlin, Mr AR to ask the Minister of Water and Sanitation

(1)Whether her department incurred any irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure as determined by the Auditor-General in the (a) 2014-15 and (b) 2015-16 financial years; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each case, (i) why was the specified expenditure incurred, (ii) who was the recipient and (iii) what tender processes were followed; (2) Whether her department has attempted to recover any of the specified expenditures in any of the specified financial years; if not, (a) why not and (b) what steps will be taken to recover the specified expenditures; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

Reply:

(1)(a) Yes, my Department has incurred irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditures as determined by the Auditor-General in the 2014-15 financial year.

(1)(b) The findings have not yet been determined by Auditor-General since the audit for the financial year 2015/16 has not been finalised.

(1)(b)(i) The irregular expenditure was incurred for various reasons as disclosed on the financial report for the year end 2014/15 which was made public and is available on my departmental website.

(1)(b)(ii) Recipients are various service providers who provided service to my Department. In terms of the National Treasury instruction on the treatment of irregular expenditure, my Department is bound to pay for the service when the obligation has been made by my Department officials on behalf of the Department. After the payment has been made the Department has to investigate how the transgression was done and take appropriate disciplinary actions as directed by the PFMA.

(1)(b)(iii) Refer to the list below for the tender processes followed that led to the transgressions committed:

  • Procurement of IT services not following the SITA Act;
  • Procurement of goods and services deliberately split into parts or items of smaller value merely to avoid complying with the requirements of the SCM policy and legislation;
  • The final decision on the acceptance of quotations not done by a properly delegated official or committee;
  • Goods or services of a transaction value of more than R2 000 procured without inviting at least three written price quotations from prospective suppliers and the deviation not approved by delegated person;
  • Deviations from competitive bidding and not test the market by procuring goods and services from none approved sole supplier;
  • Correct Supply Chain Management (SCM) processes and procedures not adhered to.
  • Payment may only be made in terms of a valid contract to a duly authorised payee.
  • Incorrect authorisation of transactions (delegations not complied with);
  • Expenditure exceeding original excess of the approved contract or quoted amount or no contract in place;
  • Lowest quotation not selected and no motivation provided;
  • Contracts awarded without original tax clearance certificates or tax clearance certificates expired;
  • The method of procurement is inconsistent with those prescribed in terms of PN 8 of 2007/2008. Goods or services of a transaction value of R10 000 to R500 000 were procured without inviting at least three written price quotations from prospective suppliers and the deviation was not approved by delegated person; and
  • Goods and services were rendered by the supplier and paid for without a valid written signed contract.

(2)(a) My Department is investigating the matter to determine whether the transgressions were in the interest of the State or not.

(2)(b) The appropriate actions will be taken upon completion of the investigation.

---00O00---

23 May 2016 - NW971

Profile picture: James, Dr WG

James, Dr WG to ask the Minister of Human Settlements

(1)How many houses were built by her department in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape in the (a) second and (b) third quarters of the 2015-16 financial year; (2) with reference to the R500 million budget allocation from the National Treasury to the specified municipality (a) how many houses will be built, (b) by what date and (c) what are the further relevant details of this funding with regard to housing; (3) whether any of the specified funds will be used for rectification purposes; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details; (4) what are the details of any monies to be used outside of the specified municipality for the building of the specified houses?

Reply:

(1) The Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality constructed 1219 new houses, serviced 139 stands with water and sanitation and rectified 1561 houses during the 2015/16 financial year.

As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard as been issued to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost.

(a) 198 houses/units were built during the second quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.

(b) 215 houses/units were built during the third quarter of 2015/16 financial year in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality, Eastern Cape.

(2) An additional R500m was allocated to the Eastern Cape Provinces by the National Department and was disbursed as follows:

    (a) R122m to Housing Development Agency which was appointed as the implementing agent for all new developments in the municipality;

    (b) R46,5m for projects to be completed in the municipality by the Eastern Cape Department of Human Settlements – ECDOHS;

    (c) R50,3m to the Municipality to complete current running projects (R50, 3m);

    (d) R95m to the Revolving Fund of municipality as a reimbursement for bridge financing to fund housing construction;

    (e) R186,2 to fund project commitments in the Eastern Cape other than Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality.

(3) The funds expended on rectification during the year under review were funded from the original Human Settlement Development Grant allocation to the Eastern Cape for 2015-16 financial year.

(4) An amount of R186, 2 m was spent on subsidised housing construction in the Eastern Cape other than in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, from additional R500m allocation.

23 May 2016 - NW872

Profile picture: Groenewald, Dr PJ

Groenewald, Dr PJ to ask the Minister of Finance

(1)Whether South African Airways (SAA) allocated any sponsorship in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16; if so, (i) to whom, (ii) for what amount, (iii) for which period and (iv) what the activity was in each case in respect of each financial year; (2) whether he was consulted in advance regarding the announcement that SAA would sponsor Bafana Bafana; if so, on what grounds he approved this, in the light of the savings measures that were announced for the financial year 2016-17; (3) what the full sponsorship of SAA to Bafana Bafana comprises; (4) whether he will make an announcement about the matter?

Reply:

1. Yes. According to South African Airways, their sponsorships in the financial years (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16 were as following (all these sponsorships were approved in accordance with the company’s delegation of authority requirements and followed an internal approval process which included the approval of a business case):

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

Notes:

  • The SA Rugby sponsorship was a four (4) year agreement that ended in on 31 December 2015
  • The SASCOC sponsorship is a three (3) year agreement that expires in March 2017
  • All other sponsorship listed above with the exception of SA Rugby and SASCOC were agreements reviewed annually
  • All SAA sponsorships including the ones listed above, are offered strictly on Value-In-Kind (VIK) basis with no outlay of cash. The sponsored parties are liable for airport taxes.

2. There is no mandatory provisions in the cost containment measures (National Treasury Instruction 01 of 2013/14) prohibiting sponsorships although accounting authorities were required to implement measures to contain operational costs and eliminate all non-essential expenditure. SAA is only required to obtain the Minister’s approval for significant transactions outlined in terms of Section 54(2) of the PFMA.

3. According to SAA, the Bafana Bafana sponsorship is valued at R110m in value in kind over a five (5) year period.

4. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter as SAA announces and accounts for all its sponsorships.

Nonetheless, prudence is required in exercising financial authority during times of financial constraints.

23 May 2016 - NW1282

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport

(a) Why are the contact names and details on her department’s website outdated (b) When will they be updated, (c) Whose responsibility is it to update the specified details and (d) What mechanisms and processes are in place to ensure that the specified information is always up-to-date in the future?

Reply:

a) The process of updating our website is underway including Contact us page. We have appointed an Online Media Service personnel to deal with it

b) The process is already underway and the Online Media Personnel is working on it

c) Its Communications Directorate to update content that goes on the Website

d) Online Media Service will be working with all stakeholders to collect information and update the website

23 May 2016 - NW815

Profile picture: Kopane, Ms SP

Kopane, Ms SP to ask the Minister of Public Works

What criteria have been put in place to decide on the proportional allocation of the buildings owned by his department to state (a) departments and (b) organs for rent?

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

(a) User Departments’ accommodation requirements differ in size and type and are informed by User Asset Management Plans (U-AMPs) for new requirements and/or ad hoc requests. The decision on the allocation of State-owned property to meet User requirements is also informed, among others, by: an assessment of the type of service being rendered by the client department; the fitness for purpose of the building; the functionality of the building; and the geographic location of the building.

The Department of Public Works (DPW) is further guided by the Space Planning Norms and Standards for Office Accommodation Use by Organs of State (Government Gazette No. 27985, 2 September 2005) to determine the appropriate space requirements for allocation.

(b) In the main, immovable assets under the custodianship of the DPW are primarily intended for the use of national User-Departments. Where assets are surplus to its needs, the DPW engages with other organs and custodians in the national, provincial and local spheres following the application of the above-mentioned criteria. Where there is no take-up within the Government sector, the Department may elect to lease out surplus properties to the private sector.

________________________________________________________________________

23 May 2016 - NW1089

Profile picture: Kohler-Barnard, Ms D

Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Minister of Public Works

In respect of each province, what are the (a) names and (b) addresses of the 1 200 properties of his department that have now been declared untraceable on the records of his department?

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

The 1 200 properties are not untraceable as suggested by the Honourable Member. Rather, the land parcels in question cannot be linked to the Geographical Information System (GIS) due to the absence of cadastral information on them. The Department of Public Works (DPW) has therefore approached the Office of the Chief Surveyor-General to provide spatial geo-reference cadastral data of South Africa for these properties in the format of the (Environmental Systems Research Institute) ESRI files that are currently being used in the Department, so that the land parcels can be linked to the GIS. It is important for all property under the custodianship of the DPW to be put on the GIS system so that the Department or the Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE) is enabled to manage immovable assets optimally, incorporating the ability to do conditionality assessments and thus provide for asset investment decisions.

Attached to this reply is Annexure A, which lists the 1 200 properties.

23 May 2016 - NW1200

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

(a) When did construction commence on the Dube Police Station in Winterveldt, in the City of Tshwane, (b) what are the causes for the delay in the completion of the construction of the specified police station, (c) what is the anticipated date of completion, (d) what is the budget allocation for the construction and completion of the specified police station, (e) what amount has been spent to date and (f) what is the projected final expenditure on the completion of the construction of the specified police station?

Reply:

(a) The original contract commenced on 13 November 2011 and the contract was terminated (DPW) on 13 March 2014 due to the contractor not performing his obligations. The second contract to finalise the outstanding work was awarded on 10 November 2015.

(b) The contractor failed to perform his obligations and the National Department of Public Works had to re-start the tendering process in order to appoint the new contractor for completion of the project.

(c) The anticipated date of completion is 9 July 2016.

(d) The budget allocation for the construction and completion of the specified police station is R 31 581 451-00.

(e) The amount spent to date is R 16 887 830-00.

(f) The projected expenditure for the project is R 31 581 451-00.

23 May 2016 - NW578

Profile picture: Tarabella - Marchesi, Ms NI

Tarabella - Marchesi, Ms NI to ask the Minister of Finance

With reference to each metropolitan municipality and based on the 2014-15 audited annual financial statements, what amount of (a) irregular expenditure, (b) unauthorised expenditure and (c) fruitless and wasteful expenditure was (i) reported, (ii) condoned, (iii) written off in an adjustment budget and (iv) recovered in terms of section 32 of the Municipal Finance Management Act 56 of 2003?

Reply:

The Honourable Member should note that the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) provides in section 32(2) that the Municipal Council must recover all irregular expenditure incurred unless the municipal council has, after an investigation by a council committee, certified the expenditure as irrecoverable and has decided to write it off. The municipal council is the only appropriate authority that should take action in relation to the irregular, unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure that has been incurred. The overall accountability process for municipal budget and expenditure must take place in a municipality, Provincial and national oversight is ‘distant’ and intervention by the two spheres only warranted as a last resort where local government has collapsed. Therefore, detailed information in this regard is therefore best obtained from the municipality concerned.

The following response is provided based on the disclosures in municipal audited annual financial statements, monitoring reports submitted by the municipality and engagements during mid-year meetings with municipal officials. The Honourable Member should also note that National Treasury has recently introduced consequence management measures that were elaborated on in MFMA Circular 76 issued in October 2015. This provided practical information on how municipalities should address such matters. It must therefore be understood within the context of the phased-in approach to implementation; hence, please noted that further actions may have been taken since these engagements with municipalities which are not reflected in this response as they are subject to ongoing monitoring and reporting.

(a) Irregular expenditure relates to categories of expenditure incurred in contravention of or not in accordance with the MFMA, Municipal Systems Act, Public Office-Bearers Act, and Supply Chain Management policy. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R1.8 billion irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. No information was reported on amounts to be recovered, although MPAC was tasked with the responsibility to investigate such matters. During mid-year engagements the municipality advised that 8 employees were dismissed, however, no information was provided on write-offs or recovery.

City of Cape Town incurred R1 million irregular expenditure of which R85 000 was condoned. Disciplinary procedures were in place. A forensic unit was established to investigate allegations; however, no information was available on write-offs or recovery.

Ekurhuleni incurred R794 million of irregular expenditure of which R32 million was condoned; however, the majority of the cases were still under investigation by MPAC and other organs of state. In instances where MPAC had concluded investigations, these were reported to council for condonement. Section 32 processes will be used to follow up on recoveries.

eThekwini incurred R500 000 of irregular expenditure of which R400 000 was condoned. The municipality advised that it is addressing this matter in terms of the legislated processes.

City of Johannesburg incurred R1.5 billion of irregular expenditure of which R4 million was condoned. 83 cases are being investigated and 10 have been completed. The municipality has implemented measures to recover money. For example, when an employee resigns before the disciplinary case has been completed, the municipality withholds the employees pension payout. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.

Mangaung incurred R289 million of irregular expenditure of which none was condoned. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed. No information was available on write-offs and recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R2.1 billion of irregular expenditure of which R12 million was condoned. Investigations are being conducted by Internal Audit and reports are tabled at MPAC from time to time, for recommendations and follow-up actions, including those instances where amounts are write-off and recoveries instituted. No further details were available.

City of Tshwane incurred R1.6 billion of irregular expenditure of which R28 million was condoned. A number of cases are currently under investigation. No information was available on write-offs and recoverable.

(b) Unauthorised expenditure means any expenditure incurred by a municipality otherwise than in accordance with section 15 or 11(3) of MFMA and includes overspending of total amount appropriated in the municipality’s approved budget or overspending of the total amount appropriated for a vote in the approved budget or expenditure from a vote unrelated to the department or functional area covered by the vote or expenditure of money appropriated for a specific purpose, otherwise than for that specific purpose or spending that is inconsistent with any conditional allocation, amongst others. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R432 million of unauthorised expenditure of which none was authorised through a special adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations. No information was available on any recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendation.

City of Cape Town had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

Ekurhuleni had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

eThekwini had reported no unauthorised expenditure.

City of Johannesburg incurred R2.7 billion of unauthorised expenditure. No information was provided on amounts authorised through an adjustment budget in terms of section 28 of the MFMA read with regulation 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations, or on amounts recovered.

Mangaung incurred R2.1 billion of unauthorised expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 28 of the MFMA read with regulations 23(6) of the Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations was passed by council. No information was available on recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R780 million of unauthorised expenditure, of which R623 million was authorised through a special adjustment budget. No information was available on recoveries.

City of Tshwane incurred R2 billion of unauthorised expenditure, of which R1.2 billion was authorised through an adjustment budget. A report was tabled in Council to address accounting-related transactions, such as over-expenditure relating to provision for depreciation, loss on disposal of assets, finance charges and debt impairment.

(c) Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure relates to expenditure incurred that could have been avoided had reasonable care been exercised. These are listed below for metropolitan municipalities:

Buffalo City incurred R5 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. No expenditure was condoned and no information was available on write-offs or recoveries. However, a report was submitted to MPAC for investigation and recommendations.

City of Cape Town incurred R440 00 of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which none was condoned; however, R146 000 was recovered. The municipality is in the process of condoning the outstanding amounts.

Ekurhuleni incurred R181 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure, of which R1.2 million was condoned. These have been referred to MPAC and other organs of state for investigation.

eThekwini had reported no fruitless and wasteful expenditure.

City of Johannesburg incurred R20 million fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R23 000 was condoned, and R361 000 was still to be recovered. The remainder is subject to the outcome of further investigations.

Mangaung incurred R29 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. A special adjustments budget in terms of Section 32 was passed by council. No information was available on condoned amounts, write-offs or recoveries.

Nelson Mandela Bay incurred R551 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R226 000 was condoned. MPAC are still investigating. No confirmation of outcomes was received with regard to write-offs or recoveries.

City of Tshwane incurred R19 million of fruitless and wasteful expenditure of which R513 000 was condoned. A number of cases are still under investigation. No confirmation of outcomes were received on write-offs or recoveries.

23 May 2016 - NW972

Profile picture: James, Ms LV

James, Ms LV to ask the Minister of Human Settlements

(1)How many government subsidised houses currently require rectification in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape; (2) (a) how many government subsidised houses were rectified in the specified municipality (i) in the (aa) 2011-12, (bb) 2012-13, (cc) 2013-14 and (dd) 2014-15 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2015 and (b) what plans does her department have to limit the need for rectification in the specified municipality?

Reply:

(1) Five thousand four hundred and sixty five (5 465) houses in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality in the Eastern Cape require rectification.

(2) (a)(i)(aa) to (cc) From 2011 to 2014 a total of 28 261 housing units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;

(dd) In 2014/15, a total number of 2 048 units were rectified by the Provincial Department and/or Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality;

(ii) Since 1st April 2015, a total of 1 561units were rectified; and

(b) As far as rectification is concerned, it is now policy that my Department will no longer rectify any houses using its funds. A directive in this regard was issued in 2015 to all Provincial Human Settlements Departments that no funding from the Human Settlements Development Grant may be utilised for rectification. Where defects and poor workmanship are identified, they remain the responsibility of the Province, Municipality and/or the Developer to take relevant remedial action against the contractor and enforce repairs at the cost of the contractor or developer.

The Honourable member is also referred my speech to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) on 12 May 2015 during the Policy Debate on the budget of my Department. I indicated,

“We are no longer rectifying houses using our budget. Any house that has defaults is the responsibility of the NHBRC, which is responsible to identify the contractor and ensure that they rectify the shoddy work at their own cost. The money currently used on rectification can and will be used in building more houses”.

In order to limit the need to rectify houses, Government established the National Home Builders Registration (NHBRC). Its mandate is to ensure that all contractors who undertake the construction of a subsidised house are registered with the NHBRC and the requirement for registration, amongst others, is that they comply with all minimum norms and standards and expertise to construct a house.

In addition, the National Department conducts structured project-level monitoring on a quarterly basis in all nine Provinces for verification of delivery. During these, the quality of construction is also observed and reported. I also recently met with contractors involved in the housing subsidy market to address challenges and to emphasize amongst other the importance of quality workmanship.

23 May 2016 - NW1201

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

(1)Whether a certain person (name and details furnished) has been declared medically unfit; if so, (a) when and (b) what are the further relevant details; (2) whether the specified person’s pension has been paid out; if not, (a) why not and (b) when is this expected to be finalised; (3) whether the specified person’s (a) medical aid and (b) pension benefits were suspended at any stage (i) during and/or (ii) after employment by the SA Police Service; if so, (aa) why and (bb) what are the further relevant details; (4) who is responsible for processing the specified person’s pension pay-out; (5) whether any case of negligence is being investigated with regard to the non-payment of the specified person’s pension pay-out; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1)(a) Yes, on 31 March 2015.

(1)(b) On grounds of medical conditions. The member was informed in writing to submit a full set of the correctly completed exit documents to the South African Police Service.

(2)(a) No. The member’s exit documents are still at the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) for further processing of pension payout.

(2)(b) According to the rules of the pension fund, pension monies will be paid out within 60 days from the date after the day on which GPAA received exit documents from SAPS (11 March 2016). Expected finalization/payment date is before or on 8 June 2016.

(3)(a) No. According to Polmed records, the member still has medical aid cover, and her medical aid benefits were never suspended at any stage.

(b)(i)&(ii) The member’s pension benefits were suspended during the period 1 April 2007 until 30 September 2007.

(aa)&(bb) The member was on leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 which emanated from the disapproval of temporary incapacity leave by the Health Risk Manager.

Upon receipt of supporting medical report from the member, SAPS reconsidered the representation and converted the leave without pay for the period 1 April 2007 to 30 September 2007 into temporary incapacity leave.

The member was reimbursed for the period of leave without pay on 24 February 2014. The pension contribution to GPAA was deducted from the reimbursement and paid to GPAA for the said period.

(4) SAPS is responsible for processing Ill-Health Retirement and the Government Pension Administration Agency (GPAA) is responsible for pension payout.

(5) No case of negligence is being investigated.

No negligence was found on the side of SAPS but rather on the side of the member due to the following reasons:

- The member submitted documents of poor quality, e.g. the decree of divorce was certified more than once.

- The member’s lawyer refused to submit the decree of divorce that was duly certified.

23 May 2016 - NW1091

Profile picture: Kohler-Barnard, Ms D

Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Ms D Kohler

(1) What is the total number of (a) fridges, (b) sets of curtains (c) couches, (d) tables and (e) chairs that were replaced at the Parliamentary villages since 1 April 2015; (2) what are the (a) names and (b) addresses of the (i) organisations and (ii) entities that the furniture was donated to; (3) what is the physical address of the department’s central storage warehouse from where furniture is distributed?

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

(1) No (a) fridges, (b) curtains, (c) couches, (d) tables and (e) chairs were replaced at the Parliamentary villages since 01 April 2015.

(2) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii) and (3) fall away.

23 May 2016 - NW1247

Profile picture: Maynier, Mr D

Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Finance

Whether the Financial Intelligence Centre (a) has conducted or (b) is conducting an investigation into (i) allegations of money laundering and (ii) any other specified matter in respect of (aa) members of the Gupta family and/or (bb) known close associates of the Gupta family; if not, in each specified case, why not; if so, in each specified case, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

The short answer is that the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) is not an “investigating authority”, and is therefore not mandated to undertake nor conduct investigations to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.

Legal provisions in the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, Act No 38 of 2001 (the FIC Act), prevent the FIC from disclosing any information on what matters the FIC may be working on or not.

In particular, the FIC Act contains strict limitations to protect the confidentiality of reporters, on the disclosure of information reported to it, information at its disposal and of details of its activities concerning such information (section 29 read with section 53, and sections 40 and 41 read with section 60, of the FIC Act).

The FIC is therefore not able to provide the information requested.

The way the Honourable Member has phrased this Question 1247, reflects certain misunderstandings of the FIC Act and how the FIC is called upon to lawfully administer the FIC Act, which I need to clarify, and do so below, to ensure the Honourable Member is better informed.

The FIC Act requires designated financial and other institutions to establish and verify the identities of their customers, and maintain related records of their customers and their transactions. The FIC Act also requires designated institutions to report certain information, such as large cash transactions (R25 000 and above) and suspicious and unusual transactions to the FIC. Importantly, an institution which reports a suspicious or unusual transaction to the FIC may continue with the reported transaction(s) unless instructed by the FIC not to do so.

The FIC Act currently does not require a financial institution to pay special attention to any category of customers. The FIC Act also does not contain any provisions which require financial institutions to apply a risk-based approach to the manner in which they manage customer relationships. In this respect the FIC Act is not in line with current international standards on measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (the FATF)).

These FATF standards require, among others, that financial institutions understand the risks associated with different business relationships and apply enhanced due diligence where they perceive higher risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. Enhanced due diligence implies more diligent identification and verification measures and stricter monitoring of customers’ transaction activities.

Parliament is currently considering amendments to the FIC Act to give effect to the requirements of the international standards. These requirements include the application by financial institutions of a risk-based approach to customer due diligence and applying additional due diligence to PEPs (described in the amendments as Persons in Prominent Positions).

I re-affirm that the FIC does not itself undertake “investigations” with a view to gather evidence to prove criminal conduct in a prosecution.

Instead, the FIC analyses information reported to it and at its disposal, and supplies financial intelligence on financial transactions of reported persons or entities, but not evidence, to competent authorities, such as investigating law enforcement authorities, statutory supervisory bodies and state security agencies, to facilitate the administration and enforcement of the laws of the Republic.

These competent authorities, as lawful recipients of FIC issued financial intelligence, in turn undertake independent criminal investigations, supervisory inspections, or other actions, respectively, within their respective legal mandates.

Accordingly, the sharing of information by the FIC with other competent authorities enables them to better discharge their respective responsibilities in the administration of the criminal justice system, the financial and non-financial sector regulatory systems, and the protection of national security, in the Republic.

The FIC Act contains strict limitations on the disclosure by the FIC of information at its disposal. This also applies to disclosure by the FIC of details of its activities concerning such information. Section 29(4) of the FIC Act provides that:

“No person who knows or suspects that a report has been or is to be made in terms of this section may disclose that knowledge or suspicion or any information regarding the contents or suspected contents of any such report to any other person, including the person in respect of whom the report is or is to be made, otherwise than-

(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;

(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;

(c) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or

(d) in terms of an order of court.”

Contravention of this provision is an offence punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 53 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.

Moreover, section 40(1) of the FIC Act restricts the FIC to disclosing information under its control:

“(a) to an investigating authority inside the Republic, the South African Revenue Service and the intelligence services, which may be provided with such information-

(i) on the written authority of an authorised officer if the authorised officer reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity; or

(ii) at the initiative of the Centre, if the Centre reasonably believes such information is required to investigate suspected unlawful activity;

(b) to an entity outside the Republic performing similar functions to those of the Centre, or an investigating authority outside the Republic which may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, obtain information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the identification of the proceeds of unlawful activities or the combating of money laundering or financing of terrorist and related activities or similar offences in the country in which that entity is established;

(c) to an accountable institution or reporting institution which or any other person who may, at the initiative of the Centre or on written request, be provided with information regarding the steps taken by the Centre in connection with transactions reported by such accountable institution, reporting institution or person, unless the Centre reasonably believes that disclosure to such accountable institution, reporting institution or person of the information requested could-

(i) inhibit the achievement of the Centre’s objectives or the performance of its functions, or the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the functions of another organ of state; or

(ii) prejudice the rights of any person;

(d) to a supervisory body, which may at the initiative of the Centre or on written request be provided with information which the Centre reasonably believes is relevant to the exercise by that supervisory body of its powers or performance by it of its functions in relation to an accountable institution

(e) in terms of an order of a court; or

(f) in terms of other national legislation.

In terms of section 41 of the FIC Act:

“No person may disclose confidential information held by or obtained from the Centre except-

(a) within the scope of that person’s powers and duties in terms of any legislation;

(b) for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act;

(c) with the permission of the Centre;

(d) for the purpose of legal proceedings, including any proceedings before a judge in chambers; or

(e) in terms of an order of court.”

Contravention of these two provisions (sections 40 and 41) is an offence and punishable by imprisonment for 15 years or to a fine not exceeding R100 million under section 60 read with section 68 of the FIC Act.

Confirmation or denial by the FIC in the public domain on whether the FIC has received or disclosed any information relating to a particular person or entity to another competent authority, or taken any other action related to such information would amount to a contravention of the above-mentioned provisions of the FIC Act and is therefore not legally permissible.

Moreover, since the FIC’s mandate requires it to assist and work in collaboration with other competent authorities in any given criminal investigation or supervisory inspection or action, any public disclosure of information relating to a specific person or entity who may be the subject of an investigation, supervisory inspection, or details of an operation being conducted by such competent authorities,. It would therefore be irresponsible for the FIC to comment in public on operational matters in which the FIC may or may not be involved. is likely to have a serious detrimental impact on the investigation, inspection or operation.

In conclusion, as Minister of Finance I therefore cannot confirm or deny whether the FIC has information relating to the specific persons or entities previously mentioned at its disposal, nor whether the FIC has or has not made information available to law enforcement authorities in support of investigations of allegations of money laundering against the specific persons or entities.

23 May 2016 - NW1090

Profile picture: Kohler-Barnard, Ms D

Kohler-Barnard, Ms D to ask the Minister of Public Works

(1) (a) What number of his department’s properties have been found to be illegally occupied currently and (b) by whom are these properties illegally occupied; (2) Have any persons involved persons involved in the illegal occupation of the specified properties been criminally charged; if so, how many persons were criminally charged?

Reply:

The Minister of Public Works

1. (a) To date, 1 287 properties have been confirmed as illegally occupied.

Below is a summary of instances of unlawful occupation:

Province

Squatters

Mud houses

Private houses/ commercial buildings

Total number of illegally occupied properties

KwaZulu Natal

128

301

110

539

Eastern Cape

20

27

75

122

Gauteng

83

0

66

149

Limpopo

3

0

29

32

Northern Cape

16

0

47

63

Western Cape

8

0

119

127

North West

31

0

104

120

Free State

8

1

17

26

Mpumalanga

31

10

68

109

Total number of illegally occupied properties

313

339

635

1 287

(b) 313 properties are occupied by squatters who have built temporary (squatter camps) residences on the properties. 339 properties are occupied by communities that have built mud structures on the land. 635 properties are occupied by private sector commercial businesses and are being used either as private residences or business premises.

(2) To date, none of the above listed matters listed matters have been referred for criminal investigation. The Department of Public Works is currently following the civil route in order to resolve disputes.

________________________________________________________________________

23 May 2016 - NW1199

Profile picture: Redelinghuys, Mr MH

Redelinghuys, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Police

(a) Which SA Police Service stations currently serve Ward 24 in the City of Tshwane, (b) what are the boundaries of the area of operation of each of the specified police stations and (c)(i) how many (aa) police officers, (bb) officials who are employed in terms of the Public Service Act, Act 103 of 1994, and (cc) operational vehicles are at each of the specified stations and (ii) what is the breakdown in terms of the (aa) rank of each specified officer and official and (bb) division each specified officer and official belongs to?

Reply:

  1. Loate and Dube police stations.

(b) A map indicating the boundaries is attached as per Annexure A.

(c)(i)

 

(c)(i)(aa) Police Act Employees

(c)(i)(bb) Public Service Act Employees

Dube

41

9

Loate

118

26

(c)(ii)(aa) and (bb) Breakdown per function and salary level is attached as per Annexure B.

(c)(i)(cc) Operational vehicles at Dube police station:

Operational vehicles at Dube police station

Sectors

6

Detective Service

5

Client Service Centre

6

Crime Prevention

2

Total operational vehicles

19

Operational vehicles at Loate police station

Detective Service

16

Client Service Centre

5

Crime Prevention

15

Total operational vehicles

36

23 May 2016 - NW1281

Profile picture: De Freitas, Mr MS

De Freitas, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Transport

(1)Whether any audits have been undertaken to determine how many ghost workers are on the books of (a) her department and (b) each entity reporting to her in the (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16 financial years; if not, (aa) why not and (bb) when, if at all, will such audits be undertaken; if so, (2) in each case, (a) when were such audits undertaken, (b) by whom, (c) what were the outcomes, (d) what are the reasons for the specified phenomenon, (e) what costs were incurred, (f) how were guilty parties handled and (g) what is (i) her department and (ii) each entity reporting to her doing with the information revealed in the specified audits?

Reply:

Department

(a) An audit on possible existence of ghost employees in the Department of Transport was undertaken by the Inhouse internal audit activity in the 2011/12 financial year, with a follow-up audit in the 2012/13 financial year.

(b) The results of both full-scale and follow-up audits revealed that there were no ghost employees in the payroll system (PERSAL) of the Department of Transport.

The issue of ghost employees is indicated as a high risk in the fraud risk register of the Department and is regularly and closely monitored by the relevant risk owners

Airports Company South Africa SOC Limited (ACSA)

1.(b) The Airports Company South Africa has conducted audits to establish whether any “ghost workers” existed on the payroll for the financial years mentioned above, 2011 to 2016.

   (i) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2011-12 financial year.

   (ii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2012-13 financial year.

   (iii) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2013-14 financial year.

   (iv) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2014-15 financial year.

   (v) Yes, an audit was conducted to determine how many ghost workers with the Company in the 2015-16 financial year.

2. (a) Audits have been conducted by Internal Audit and External Auditors for the period 2011 to 2014.

    (b) Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) and Sizwe Ntsaluba Gobodo (SNG) for the period 2011 to 2014. The Auditor General of SA (AGSA) audited for the period 2015 to 2016.

    (c) There were no findings raised related to the existence of “ghost workers”.

    (d) – (f) Please see response to (c) above.

Air Traffic and Navigation Services SOC Limited (ATNS)

1. As part of the part of the annual Internal Financial Controls audit, the payroll process is subject to audit annually with audit procedures applied to detect ghost employees.

(b) (i) 2011-12

(ii) 2012-13

(iii) 2013-14

(iv) 2014-15

(v) 2015-16

(aa) the audits are done annually.

(bb) the audits are done annually.

2. The audits are undertaken annually between November and February by internal audit and further by external auditors. There have been no ghost employees found through audit procedures over the years.

   (a) The audits are done annually.

   (b) Both ATNS internal audit and external audit.

   (c) No ghost employees were found.

   (d) None of the above.

   (e) None of the above.

   (f) None of the above.

   (g) None of the above.

South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA)

1. Yes (a) N/A

(b) the SACAA’s Internal Audit division conducted ghost employee checks/reviews through payroll audits which are performed annually.

(i) No audit was conducted in 2011-12,

(ii) Audits were conducted in 2012-13,

(iii) and 2013-14, (iv) and in 2014-15.

(v) The audit for 2015-16 has not taken place yet.

(aa) None of the above

(bb) 2015-16 audit is scheduled to take place during the 2016-17 FY.

2. (a) In each case the audits are conducted after the end of the financial year.

(b) The audits are carried out by the Internal Audit division using the Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs) to identify any anomalies within the payroll system.

(c) For the audits conducted in 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 NO ghost employees were identified.

(d) None of the above.

(e) None of the above.

(f) None of the above.

(g) None of the above.

(i) None of the above.

(ii) No incidences were revealed by the audits in the SACAA.

Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (CBRTA)

(1) (b) The C-BRTA has not undertaken any audits specifically to determine how many ghost workers are on the books on any of the given financial years i.e. 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and (v) 2015-16. However, the Agency has put internal control measures in place to ensure that only valid employees are paid and therefore mitigating against the risk of paying ghost employees. Among others, these internal control measures include but are not limited to:

  • Input on certain payroll transactions by one employee (a Senior Administrative Officer), where approval for processing is then provided by the Payroll Specialist;
  • The review of the monthly payroll by another employee at Senior Manager level, against all input documentation; and
  • The approval of Payroll for payment after a further review by the Executive Manager.

Furthermore, the periodic internal and annual external audits of the entity are undertaken with payroll being one of the specific audit items on the programme. None of these audits have uncovered any ghost workers in the reporting periods in question. (aa) The Agency has not seen the need to conduct these audits because the internal control processes in place have been found to be adequate and the risk of paying ghost employees is mitigated.

(bb) While there are no specific audits conducted on the ghost employees, the following internal auditors have conducted payroll audits and have found the controls within payroll environment to be effective:

Financial year

Internal auditors

External auditors

2011-12

IA Professionals and Related Services

Auditor General South Africa

2012-13

Nkonki

Auditor General South Africa

2013-14

Nkonki

Auditor General South Africa

2014-15

Price Waterhouse Coopers

Auditor General South Africa

2015-16

Price Waterhouse Coopers

Auditor General South Africa

Road Accident Fund (RAF)

1. (b) To determine whether any ghost workers are on the books of the Road Accident Fund (RAF), the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA), as part of its annual audit of the RAF, performs an audit to identify possible ghost employees, whilst the RAF performs: a 100% data analytics review, and on a sample basis, verification of employees on the SAP system against the physical information on personnel files; internal financial control reviews, on a sample basis, to ensure that employees who resigned, or who were dismissed, are timeously terminated on the SAP system; and, further ad hoc audits.

The number of respective audits totalled (i) 1 audit in the 2011-12, (ii) 2 audits in the 2012-13, (iii) 6 audits in the 2013-14, (iv) 6 audits in the 2014-15 financial years;

(aa) this question is not applicable as audits were undertaken during the aforementioned periods, (bb) the annual and other regular audits referred to in 1(b) will continue in future;

(2) In each case the audits -

(a) were undertaken:

(b) by:

following the RAF’s year-end at 31 March 2011, 31 March 2012, 31 March 2013, and 31 March 2014, as part of the statutory annual audit,

AGSA,

on 24 and 25 November 2011, in respect of an ad hoc 100% physical head count audit,

RAF Internal Audit Department,

during June 2013, September 2013, November 2013, March 2014, April 2014, July 2014, November 2014, and March 2015, as part of the internal financial control reviews,

RAF Internal Audit Department,

during April 2013 and April 2014, as part of the data analytics review,

RAF Internal Audit Department,

(c) no ghost employees were identified, therefore questions (d), (e), (f), and (g)(ii) are not applicable to the RAF.

Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC)

1. There hasn’t been any ghost employees for the period 2011/2012 – 2014/2015

The latest physical verification / audit was done during September 2015. In this verification process/ audit no ghost employees identified.

The 2015/2016 verification is still under progress, the results of which will be available once done.

2. (a) The latest verification was done during September and October 2015 – this verification relates to the 2014/2015 financial year.

(b) The verification for 2014/2015 financial year was done by the Payroll unit of the RTMC

(c) The outcome for the 2014/2015 verification dictates that there were no ghost employees at RTMC.

(d) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees.

(e) There was no cost incurred for the 2014/2015 verification as the exercise was done internally by Payroll unit of the RTMC. The 2015/2016 verification process has not been completed, but were can indicate that there are no amounts to be incurred as the exercise is done internally by RTMC Payroll.

(f) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees

(g) Not Applicable as there was no ghost employees

Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA)

1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.

(aa) Not Applicable

(bb) Not Applicable

2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.

(b) Auditor General, SEMA/IRS and Audit & Risk Management Solutions

(c) No ghost employees were found

(d) Internal controls are in place and are reviewed periodically

(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit. Internal audit does the payroll audit as part of their annual systems audit.

(f) Not Applicable

(g) Not Applicable

South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL)

1. Yes, audits have been undertaken by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency in (i) 2011-12, (ii) 2012-13, (iii) 2013-14, (iv) 2014-15 and 2015-16 Financial years.

(aa) Not Applicable

(bb) Not Applicable

2. (a) 2011/12 - ; 2012/13 – 01 May 2013; 2013/14 – 01 May 2015; 2014/15 – 05 May 2015; 2015/16 – 30 April 2016.

(b) Auditor General South Africa

(c) No ghost employees were found

(d) Internal controls are in place and AGSA performs on audit on an annual basis verifying each employees

(e) Payroll audits are conducted as part of Auditor General’s scope for audit.

(f) Not Applicable

(g) Not Applicable

Ports Regulator of South Africa (PRSA)

  1. (b) There were no special audits undertaken by the Ports Regulator since both the internal and external auditors perform employee verification for all employees taking into account the fact that the Ports Regulator employs only 17 employees. The verifications are done annually and did take place in (i) 2011/12, (ii) 2012/13, 2013/14, (iv) 2014/15 and (v) 2015/16. (aa) N/A, (bb) N/A.
  2. (a) these audits were undertaken each year by (b) internal and external auditors and (c) there were no ghost employees found on the payroll. (d) Strict internal controls prevented this, (e) the audits were done as part of the annual audit (f) there were no guilty parties to be handled.

 

South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA)

SAMSA has not undertaken audits on ghost workers as a separate audit exercises. However, the Auditor-General does verify the existence of employees on the SAMSA payroll during their audits. The AG has not identified any ghost worker on the SAMSA payroll during their previous audits.

Railway Safety Regulator (RSR)

The Human Resources and Payroll Audits are undertaken on a yearly basis by both the Internal Auditors as well as the Auditor-General and no audit findings for ghost employees were identified for the following financial years:

Financial Years

Ghost Workers

2011-2012

No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

2012-2013

No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

2013-2014

No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

2014-2015

No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

2015-2016

No audit findings for non-existing employees during the Payroll auditing

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA)

1. No audits have been undertaken to determine specifically how many ghost workers are on the books of PRASA in the financial years mentioned. PRASA Internal Audit Department performs Human Capital Management (HCM) audits, where the scope relates to the adequacy and effectiveness of HCM processes including:

  • Policies and Procedures
  • Staff Retention and Succession Planning, Scarce Skills Plans
  • Overtime Management
  • Leave Management, Productivity and Absenteeism
  • Recruitment  and Selection
  • Terminations and Suspensions
  • Salary increases and promotions
  • Payroll
  • Organisational structure and reporting lines
  • Employee Wellness Programme

The Auditor General also performs audit on the HCM function as part of their annual year end audit. PRASA also undertakes monthly payroll reconciliations, and to date no discrepancies have been uncovered.

2. See (1) above.

23 May 2016 - NW1285

Profile picture: Shinn, Ms MR

Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services

(1)Has the Universal Service Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA) played any role in the planning of SA Connect; if not, (a) why not and (b) what role will USAASA play in the future planning and rollout of the programme; (2) (a) what is the estimated cost of (i) planning and (ii) rolling out (aa) Phase 1 and (bb) Phase 2 of SA Connect, (b) what is the detailed breakdown of how this funding will be spent in the (i) 2016-17, (ii) 2017-18 and (iii) 2018-19 financial years and (c) which budget allocation will the specified funds come from in each of the specified financial years?

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:-

1. No.

(a) The Department has engaged with USAASA to ensure alignment of the Broadband initiatives being funded through the USAF and SA Connect Phase 1 hence USAASA’s current and future plans are aligned with the SA Connect Phase 1 District Municipalities.

(b) The Department and USAASA will continue to engage to outline the agency roles on SA Connect implementation taking into consideration developments in the sector

2. (aa) (i)-(ii) The estimated cost for Phase1 of SA Connect is R6.56billion

(bb) (i) – (ii) The estimated cost for Phase2 of SA Connect is R67.4 billion

(b) (i)-(iii) Phase 1 detailed breakdown

Phase 1 Budget Allocation (Million)

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

Total

R 516.34

R 719. 52

R 720. 37

R6.56 Billion

(i)- (iii) Phase 2 detailed breakdown

Phase 2 Budget Allocation (Million)

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

Total

R 823, 9

R 1, 557

R 2, 213

67.42 Billion

(c) The funding for Phase 1 will come from Budget allocation MTEF 2016/-2018/19. No allocation for Phase 2

23 May 2016 - NW1287

Profile picture: Basson, Mr LJ

Basson, Mr LJ to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services

(1)What meetings of (a) the National ICT Forum and (b) each of its four forums have taken place since 1 October 2015, in each case indicating (i) dates, (ii) venues of these meetings, as well as (iii) agendas and (iv) records of decisions made at each meeting; (2) Which (a) reports and/or (b) initiatives have been instigated by any of the specified forums, in each case providing the relevant details including (i) plans of action and (ii) deadlines where applicable?

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:-

1. (a) Since 1 October 2015, the National ICT Forum has held a number of meetings through its various structures, which comprises of the Chairpersons Forum, Chamber meetings and Working Committees.

(b) (i) Meeting Dates:

      • Chairpersons Forum – 30 November 2015, 11 March 2016 and 06 May 2016
      • Economic Chamber – 3 March 2016
      • Social Chamber – 27 November 2015 and 19 February 2016
      • Governance and Security Chamber – 7 December 2015
      • ICTs and Disability Chamber – 2 December 2015 and 17 March 2016

(ii) Venues:

  • Chairpersons Forum – Director General’s Boardroom (Department)
  • Economic Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
  • Social Chamber – Blue Crane boardroom (Department)
    • Governance and Security Chamber – Blue Crane Boardroom (Department)
  • ICTs and Disability Chamber – Burgherspark Hotel (Pretoria)

 

(iii) Agendas:

Chairpersons Forum – Stakeholder Mobilization and Participation, Resource Mobilization, Draft Work Programmes of Chambers, National Workshop

Economic Chamber – ICT Skills, ICT SMMEs support, Electronic Manufacturing, Postal Sector and ICTs

  • Social Chamber – e-Health, e-Education, e-Justice and e-Agriculture
  • Governance and Security Chamber – e-Commerce, Internet Governance, Policy Mapping and Cyber Security.
  • ICTs and Disability Chamber – ICT Assistive Devices, Access to Government websites, Access to Banking Services

(iv) Records of decisions:

  • Chambers have developed their Terms of Reference and firmed up their structures
  • Chambers have now resolved and are prepared draft Work Programmes which still need to
  • be approved by the department
  • The Chairpersons Forum agreed to convene a National Workshop to discuss and endorse
  • the draft Work Programmes

(2)(a) Reports and (b) Initiatives

Initiatives that are coming out of the draft work programmes of the chambers include the following:

  • Conduct a National ICT Skills Audit with relevant stakeholders
  • Develop and implement a basic National e-Literacy Programme
  • Facilitate creation of Creative Hubs for SMMEs in townships with relevant support
  • Support development of ICT applications that will enable SMMEs to expand business opportunities
  • Develop and implement a Cybersecurity Awareness programme
  • To develop a National set of Principles/framework for Internet Governance in South Africa
  • Establish/ or revive an Intergovernmental Forum on Internet Governance
  • Create a cybersecurity Body of Knowledge for general access by South Africans
  • Explore Youth Job Creation Programme focusing on cybersecurity awareness
  • Facilitate engagements with relevant to improve access to banking services, government websites, employment, education and broadcasting for people with disabilities.

A National Workshop will be convened before the end of June 2016 to discuss and endorse the draft programmes of each Chamber. The workshop will also discuss resource mobilization for implementation of the work programme and timelines.

23 May 2016 - NW1359

Profile picture: Alberts, Mr ADW

Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Transport

(1)(a)(i) How many road users as a percentage of the total average number of monthly road users and (ii) what exact number of road users have made use of the offer by the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) to obtain a 60% discount on their e-toll accounts if they pay the specified accounts before 1 May 2016 and (b)(i) what sum total payments and (ii) what percentage of payments has been been made in accordance with the specified offer by (aa) individual road users and (bb) business concerns; (2) whether Sanral intends taking futher legal steps agains non-paying e-toll road users; if not, why not; if so, (a) whether the envisaged legal steps include criminal legal processes, (b) what will be the extent of that, (c) by which date this will happen and (d) what is the extent of the legal costs which has been budgeted for settling the claims?

Reply:

(1) (a)(i) & (ii) There are approximately 2.5 million distinct vehicles using the GFIP on a monthly basis. Approximately 1,45 million vehicles are currently registered or making payment. SANRAL received more than 600 000 enquiries on the less60% offer via the web or via inbound calls from the public. Of the 600 000, approximately 130 000 have settled their account or made arrangements to settle. There is however still work in progress related to the balance of the 600 000 users indicated above.

(b)(i) R136m discounted paid and payment agreements for a further R123m discounted entered into.

(ii) (aa) & (bb) – the system is not set up to distinguish between type of users.

(2) SANRAL is an agency of Government and must comply with the requirements of the PFMA. There is a legal obligation on users to pay toll at a toll plaza or tolling point. SANRAL is obliged to collect outstanding debts to Government in terms of the PFMA.

(a) The SANRAL Act allows for both civil and criminal legal processes. Both are available to SANRAL and the prosecuting authorities.

(b) The extent of these processes are determined by legislation

(c) The NPA already successfully prosecuted a person in 2015 for the non-payment of toll as well as fraud. Further cases are investigated. The issuing of civil summonses already commenced.

(d) We trust that the honourable member is not suggesting that due to legal costs, SANRAL should neglect its obligation to collect the debt owed as mandated in the PFMA. As the honourable member would appreciate the costs are dependent on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts.

23 May 2016 - NW869

Profile picture: Groenewald, Dr PJ

Groenewald, Dr PJ to ask the Minister of Finance

(1)Whether the SA Airways still allows firearms handed in by passengers to be flown to their destination; if not, (a) when was the practice discontinued and (b) what is the reason for this; (2) whether he will make a statement about the matter?

Reply:

1. South African Airways has indicated that on all destinations they have stopped transporting fire-arms for passengers. Additional information is available on SAA’s webiste at http://www.flysaa.com/za/en/flyingSAA/baggage/firearms.html

2. The Minister does not intend to make an announcement on this matter.

23 May 2016 - NW1286

Profile picture: Basson, Mr LJ

Basson, Mr LJ to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services

(a) What steps have been taken to replace the three councillors who resigned from the National Broadband Advisory Council in 2015, (b) who is the current chair of the specified council and (c) what meetings has he had with the specified chairperson since taking office, in each case indicating (i) dates, (ii) venue and (iii) agenda of any specified meetings?

Reply:

(a) There have not been attempts to replace the Councillors. Minister met with the previous Chairperson and expressed the intention to change the structure of the Council to derive maximum value for all stakeholders.

(b) There is currently no designated Chairperson of the council.

(c) There has not been any meetings with the Chairperson.

23 May 2016 - NW1222

Profile picture: Filtane, Mr ML

Filtane, Mr ML to ask the Minister of Police

Whether he is aware of the alleged irregularities (details furnished) at the Madeira Police Station in Mthatha, Eastern Cape; if not, will he institute an investigation into the alleged irregularities for the purposes of bringing a solution; if so, (a) what steps, if any, have been taken to resolve the specified irregularities, (b) what is the (i) progress and (ii) time frame of the specified steps and (c) what are the further relevant details?

Reply:

The Provincial Commissioner of the Eastern Cape was not aware of the alleged irregularities as contained in the attached statements to this Question in Parliament, which are viewed in a very serious light.

 (a) Two (2) Senior Officers have been appointed to conduct an in-depth investigation into the alleged irregularities at Madeira Police Station with a view to take appropriate action against whoever might be implicated in such irregularities.

 (b) The investigation will commence immediately and is envisaged to be finalized within twenty one (21) days.

 (c) Progress will be reported in due course.

23 May 2016 - NW893

Profile picture: Ndlozi, Dr MQ

Ndlozi, Dr MQ to ask the Minister of Mineral Resources

(1)Has he earned any additional income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, since his appointment as Minister; if so, (a) when, (b) how much did he earn, (c) from which businesses and (d) for what work;

Reply:

1. No. The Minister has not earned any additional income from doing business with government

a) N/A

b) N/A

c) N/A

d) N/A

(2)     whether his (a) spouse, (b) children and (c) close family earned income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, through his appointment as Minister; if so, in respect of each case, (i) when, (ii) how much did each earn, (iii) from which businesses and (iv) for what work?          NW1019E

ANSWER

2. No family members of the Minister have earned incoming from doing business with government.

i) N/A

ii) N/A

iii) N/A

iv) N/A

 

Reply

Approved/not approved

Mr MJ Zwane, MP

Minister of Mineral Resources

 

 

Date Submitted:-………………/………………/2016

 

23 May 2016 - NW1284

Profile picture: Shinn, Ms MR

Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services

(a) what amount of the R1.2 billion allocated to broadband in his department’s Medium Term Expenditure Framework 2016-17 to 2018-19 financial years is allocated to SA Connect and (b) what is the detailed breakdown of items the specified allocation will be spent on in each of the specified financial years; 2) (a) what steps in line with the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999, are being taken to select a lead agency for SA Connect, (b) what skills are required of the lead agency and (c) what documents, such as requests for proposals, have been published in this regard to invite private sector participation in the (i) planning, (ii) project management and (iii) execution of the programmes under SA Connect up to the latest specified date for which information is available; 3) Whether any funds allocated for SA Connect have been spent in the (a) 2015-16 financial year and/or (b) since 1 April 2016 to the latest specified date; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; 4) What amount of funding allocated for SA Connect in the 2015-16 financial year rolled over to the 2016-17 financial year?

Reply:

1. (a) R1.54 million is allocated for the implementation of SA Connect Phase 1.

(b) The allocated amount will be spent to procure broadband connectivity services for the Phase 1 sites. Detailed Breakdown:

Budget Allocation (Million)

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

Total

336 600

422 300

711 900

1 450 800

2. (a) The Department is engaging with SITA to explore options of the appointment of the service provider that will be in line with the existing procurement legislations and regulations.

(b) The lead agency should be an organisation with the following capabilities:

   (i) To coordinate between public & private sector players,

   (ii) To raise funding to expand fibre infrastructure,

   (iii) To rollout simultaneously in all the phase 1 districts as per the Broadband Implementation Plan,

   (iv) To leverage on existing infrastructure to minimise duplication.

(c) The Department is engaging stakeholders to finalise the appointment process and no requests for proposals have been published yet.

    (i) - (iii) See (c) above

3) (a) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for this project of which R100 million was transferred to Sentech for dual illumination and R50, 240 million to SAPO for the National Address System.

(b) No funds were spent since 1 April 2016. Because the department was engaging with the relevant stakeholders to finalise the appointment process.

4) In the 2015/2016 financial year R200 million was allocated for the project. An amount of R49, 760 million was rolled over.

23 May 2016 - NW1283

Profile picture: Shinn, Ms MR

Shinn, Ms MR to ask the Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services

(a) How much funding has been allocated for the Virtual Cyber Security Hub hosted by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for the 2016-17 financial year and (b) what are the specific deliverables that the specified hub must deliver against these funds; (2) (a) how much funding has been allocated for the specified hub for the (i) 2017-18 and (ii) 2018-19 financial years and (b) what items and programmes will the funding be spent on in each of the specified years; (3) whether his department is the sole funder of the specified hub; if not, (a) what is the name of any other funder, (b) what is the financial contribution of each other funder and (c) what are the specific items and programmes to be delivered against these funds in each case, respectively; if so, what is the position in this regard; (4) (a) How much did his department spend in each year that it contributed to the specified hub and (b) what items and programmes were these funds spent on in each specified year?

Reply:

I have been advised by the Department as follows:-

(1)(a) The amount allocated to the Cybersecurity Hub for the 2016/2017 financial year is R 16, 418, 000.00

(b) Specific deliverables include

  • Formalise engagements with stakeholder, which supports the sharing and technical integration of cybersecurity incident information
  • Operationalisation of the Proactive and Reactive services
  • Increased functionality of Hub’s tools
  • Assist in the enablement and establishment of sector CERTs
  • Dissemination of incident and thereat information to stakeholders
  • Undertaking of a cybersecurity awareness programs which includes upgrade of the Hub’s website functionality

(2)(a)(i) In the 2017/2018 financial year R 15, 325, 000.00 has been allocated

(ii) In the 2018/2019 financial year R 12, 297, 000.00has been allocated

It should be noted that the allocated budget for these two financial years are subject to change as the MTSF is yet to be finalised.

(b) The monies will be used as follows:

  • Obtaining international certification for the Hub
  • Establishment of both private and public sector industry specific CERTs
  • Integration of incident information
  • Development and deployment of cybersecurity audit and readiness tools
  • Ongoing awareness programs

(3)(a) The Department is the sole funder of the Hub

(b) N/A

(c) N/A

(4)(a) In the 2014/2015 financial year R 18 533 013 was allocated

In the 2015/2016 financial year R 15 156 157 was allocated

(b) In the 2014/2015 financial year the monies were used for:

  • Establishment of the Hub
  • Development of Operational Processes
  • Development of Policies and Procedures

In the 2015/2016 financial year the monies were used for:

  • Research
  • Technical and operational support
  • System integration
  • Facilities, facilities maintenance
  • Infrastructure costs
  • Stakeholder engagement

23 May 2016 - NW990

Profile picture: Maynier, Mr D

Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Finance

What are the full details of the reprioritisation of funds for the 2016 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, as highlighted on pages 57 and 58 of the 2016 Budget Review, in terms of (a) what amount of funds in Rands has been reprioritised from each (i) national department, (ii) province and (iii) municipality and (b) what percentage do the specified amounts in each case represent of funds reprioritised (i) at each level and (ii) of the total amount of funds reprioritised?

Reply:

The details of the reprioritisation of funds in the 2016 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, subsequent to the aggregates tabled in the 2015 Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement are set out below.

(a)(i) Amounts reprioritised from national departments:

see the link:  http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Table.docx

  1. As part of the reprioritisation exercise, the Department of Energy receives additional funding taken from the local government level: Integrated National Electrification Programme. This results in a net positive reprioritisation of R87.2 million in 2016/17.

(a)(ii) Amounts reprioritised from provinces:

The provincial department-specific impact of the provincial equitable share reprioritisation is determined through separate provincial-own budgetary processes and legislative approval. Thus the details for each province were not known at the time of tabling the 2016 national budget; however the aggregate provincial reprioritisation was. The provincial equitable share reprioritisation per province is shown in the table below.

Provincial equitable share: heres the list: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Equitable.docx

The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient province was determined by the department that acts as the national transferring officer. The effect of grant reductions on provincial aggregates is shown in the table below and is informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.

Provincial conditional grants:

 heres the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990Accountable.docx

(a)(iii) Amounts reprioritised from municipalities:

Local government equitable share:

The impact on municipalities of the R1.8 billion in reprioritisation of the local government equitable share over the MTEF is not shown separately per municipality, as many factors influenced these allocations. These are set out in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Division of Revenue (Annexure W1 to the Division of Revenue Bill and the Budget Review). The allocations amount to 26.4 per cent of the local government level reprioritisation and 5.5 per cent of the total reprioritisation over the MTEF.

The changes affecting municipal allocations include data updates to variables in the local government equitable share formula; to account for changes in projected inflation, electricity and water bulk costs and household growth rates. Significant changes also resulted from the decision by the Municipal Demarcation Board to re-determine multiple municipal boundaries, including the merging of several municipalities. All new demarcations are reflected in the 2016 Division of Revenue Bill and therefore allocations for individual municipalities in the 2015 and 2016 Division of Revenue Bills are not directly comparable where demarcations have been changed. The allocations for Special Support for Councilor Remuneration and Ward Committees also changed as a result of the merging of some municipalities.

The amount reduced from grant allocations to each recipient municipality was determined by the department that acts as the transferring officer. The aggregate grant reductions for individual grants are shown in the table below and are informed by the respective allocation criteria for each individual grant. Details of allocation criteria are provided in the respective conditional grant frameworks for each grant as contained in 2016 Division of Revenue Bill.

Local government conditional grants:

here's the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990conditiongrant.docx

(b)(i) &

(b)(ii) The percentage that each amount represents of the funds reprioritised in the sphere of government that it resides in is show in the tables above under (a)(i), (a)(ii) and (a)(iii). These tables above also show the percentage that funds represent of the total amount of reprioritisation over the MTEF.

Reprioritisation at each sphere of government as a percentage of the total:

see the link: http://www.pmg.org.za/files/RNW990reproriasition.docx

23 May 2016 - NW1184

Profile picture: Ollis, Mr IM

Ollis, Mr IM to ask the Minister of Police

(1)Whether the case opened by the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) into financial irregularities and alleged corruption involving certain persons (names furnished), following the findings of a forensic report completed in November 2012, has been finalised; if not, has it been closed; (2) (a) who has been interviewed during the investigation of the specified case, (b) what findings were made in the specified case, (c) what charges, if any, were laid against any person and (d) when will the specified case be finalised; (3) whether any person was (a) arrested and/or (b) prosecuted in this regard; if not, (i) why not in each case and (ii) when will the implicated persons be prosecuted; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (4) whether any feedback was given to (a) Nedlac and/or (b) him regarding the results of the specified investigation; if so, in each case, (i) when was the feedback given and (ii) what was the feedback?

Reply:

(1) Yes, a case docket was opened by the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac). The matter is still under investigation and is being investigated by the Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), a subcomponent of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI).

(2)(a) Witnesses who were involved in the day-to-day running of Nedlac were interviewed.

(2)(b) The case is under investigation.

(2)(c) Allegations of fraud are being investigated.

(2)(d) The matter will be finalised as soon as all the prosecutor’s instructions have been dealt with.

(3)(a) No arrests have been made yet.

(3)(b) No person has been prosecuted yet.

(3)(b)(i) The case is still under investigation.

(3)(b)(ii) When the investigation and the case is finalised in court.

(4)(a) A progress report/feedback has been given to Nedlac.

(4)(b)(i) On 2016-03-08.

(4)(b)(ii) Feedback given was that the matter was still under investigation and further particulars were requested from Nedlac.

23 May 2016 - NW1177

Profile picture: Volmink, Mr HC

Volmink, Mr HC to ask the Minister of Finance

Has there been a review of the allocation of the equitable share to provinces for health services in the (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15 and (c) 2015-16 financial years; if not, (i) why not and (ii) does the National Treasury intend to make any changes to the equitable share formula; if so, what changes have been made to the equitable share formula in the specified financial years?

Reply:

Yes. The provincial equitable share formula is reviewed and updated annually with new data, where available. Periodic reviews of the formula are also undertaken.

The provincial share of nationally raised revenue is disbursed to provinces using the Provincial Equitable Share (PES) formula. The formula comprises of six components, of which health is one of them, weighted at 27 per cent.

The structure of the health component in the provincial equitable share was amended through a review undertaken in 2010/11. The revised health component, introduced from 2011/12, uses a risk-adjusted capitation index and output data from public hospitals to estimate each province’s share of the health component. These two subcomponents work together to balance the needs (risk-adjusted capitation) and demands (output component). Caseload data in the health component, which measures demand on the ground, changes from year to year and is updated every year with data from the national Department of Health’s Information System. However, the epidemiological landscape that drives the risk profile of a population in a province is unlikely to change from year to year and this subcomponent of the health component is updated on a 4 to 5 years interval cycle.

A review of the provincial equitable share formula is currently underway that will, amongst others, assess all data sources available for each of the components of the formula, including the health component. The outcomes of this review will be implemented in future medium term expenditure frameworks (MTEFs).

(i) Not applicable.

(ii) With respect to the health component, yearly data updates were applied for (a) 2013/14, (b) 2014/15 and (c) 2015/16 as follows:

  • 2013/14

          The health component for 2013/14 was updated with the 2011 General Household Survey, 2012 mid-year population estimates, data from the Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2010/11 and 2011/12. The details of such updates are contained in pages 77 to 79 of the 2013 Division of Revenue Bill.

  • 2014/15

        The health component for 2014/15 was updated with the 2012 General Household Survey, 2013 mid-year population estimates, data from the    Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2011/12 and 2012/13. The details of such updates are contained in pages 77 to 78 of the 2014 Division of Revenue Bill.

  • 2015/16

         The health component for 2015/16 was updated with the 2013 General Household Survey, 2014 mid-year population estimates, data from the Council for Medical Schemes’ Risk Equalisation Fund, and District Health Information Services data for 2012/13 and 2013/14. The details of such updates are contained in pages 79 to 80 of the 2015 Division of Revenue Bill.

23 May 2016 - NW1364

Profile picture: Alberts, Mr ADW

Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Transport

(a) How many (i) individuals and (ii) business concerns have been summoned by the SA National Roads Agency Ltd (Sanral) regarding their outstanding e-toll accounts, (b) what is the scale from the smallest to the largest amount being claimed, (c) what is the legal cause of each specified claim, (d)(i) which legal firms have been employed to institute legal steps and (ii) in terms of which process were they appointed, (e)(i) whether senior advocates will be appointed regarding any of the specified claims, (ii) who are the senior advocates and (iii) in terms of what process were they appointed and (f)(i) what do the legal costs currently amount to regarding the issuing of summonses and (ii) what amount has Sanral budgeted for settling the specified claims?

Reply:

(a) (i) 5449 individuals

(ii) 837 Corporate/businesses

(b) Smallest amount = R204.75

Largest amount = R10 551 548.16

(c) The Legal cause is Non Payment of Toll.

(d) (i) & (ii) From a Summons issue perspective Daly Attorneys were used. They form part of the Contractor’s business model with their sub-contractors.

Werksmans Inc. is on a retainer as Sanral’s attorneys of record related to e-Toll matters. A due SCM process was followed in their initial appointment.

(e) (i) Senior advocates may be appointed depending on the specifics of the defences offered for specified claims. However, no matter has reached a stage where the particular defences are known.

(ii) (iii) The appointment of senior advocates depends on the legal matters to be argued and the availability of a particular senior advocate.

(f) (i) There are fixed costs applicable to the drafting of summonses, costs of the court and sheriff costs. (ii) There is no specific budget for legal costs. SANRAL has a general budget for legal costs. Furthermore, depending on the particular process, legal costs are determined by the courts and if a defendant found guilty, the costs are carried by the defendant.

23 May 2016 - NW940

Profile picture: Brauteseth, Mr TJ

Brauteseth, Mr TJ to ask the Minister of Mineral Resources

Has (a) he and/or (b) his Deputy Minister ever (i) met with any (aa) member, (bb) employee and/or (cc) close associate of the Gupta family and/or (ii) attended any meeting with the specified persons (aa) at the Gupta’s Saxonwold Estate in Johannesburg or (bb) anywhere else since taking office; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each specified case, (aaa) what are the names of the persons who were present at each meeting, (bbb)(aaaa) when and (bbbb) where did each such meeting take place and (ccc) what was the purpose of each specified meeting?

Reply:

The Minister has not met with any member, nor close associate of the Guptas. He has also not attended a meeting with a specified person at the Gupta’s Saxonworld Estate in Johannesburg.

20 May 2016 - NW855

Profile picture: Sonti, Ms NP

Sonti, Ms NP to ask the Minister of Social Development

(1)How many cases of unauthorised, illegal and falsified deductions of old age pensions in each province have been reported to her department since 2013; (2) how many of the reported cases (a) have been finalised and (b) are still being investigated since 2013; (3) how many (a) of the reported cases that were investigated involved SA Social Security Agency (SASSA) officials and (b) SASSA employees have been arrested in this regard since 1 January 2013?

Reply:

(1) It is difficult to isolate the number of unauthorized, illegal and falsified deductions which have been effected, as not all deductions are unauthorized and illegal. There are many deductions taking place which have been authorized by the beneficiaries. However, since 2014, when SASSA started recording and tracking the disputes, a total of 21 466 disputes have been recorded. In addition, during January 2016, syndicate fraud affecting approximately 8 000 social grant beneficiary accounts was uncovered originating in the Western Cape. For all these cases, the beneficiaries have been refunded the amounts deducted and a criminal investigation is underway.

(2) Of these 21 466, a total of (a) 12 160 have been resolved and (b) 9 094 are still under investigation.

(3) (a) None of the cases under investigation involve SASSA officials. Deductions occur once the social grant money has been paid into the bank account, and generally involve the beneficiary responding to SMS (mobile) marketing or taking a loan from a micro-lender.

(b) Since the practice does not involve SASSA officials, no SASSA official has been arrested in this regard.