Questions and Replies

Reply:

(1)(a) Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) are, however, used as a non-lethal operational option by trained members of Public Order Policing (POP).

The device provides exceptional clarity and is used for short and long range communication with individuals and large crowds to easily establish standoff zones, inform, direct and prevent misunderstandings, peacefully resolve dangerous situations and to save the lives of both the public and law enforcement members during elevated risk operations. It offers a less physical option to kinetic measures such as tear gas, rubber bullets, pepper spray, tasers and flash grenades.

The following regulations and standards guide the use of the Long Range Acoustic Devices (LRAD) in South Africa:

• The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act No 85 of 1993);
• Regulation of Gatherings Act, 1993 (Act No 205 of 1993);
• Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act No 108 of 1996);
• South African National Standards (SANS) 10103:2004 The Measurement and Rating of Environmental Noise with respect to Land Use, Health, Annoyance and Speech Communication;
• Hearing Conservation Regulations, promulgated under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 (Act No 85 of 1993);
• The South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) 083: 1996 Measurement and Assessment of Occupational Noise. (SANS 10083:2013 Edition 5.2); and
• SANS10083:2013 “SABS 083” The South African Bureau of Standards’ Code of Practice for the Measurement and Assessment of Occupational Noise for Hearing Conservation Purposes, SABS 083.

The device was tested by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), which confirmed that the device is suitable for its intended use.

(1)(b) The SAPS is not aware of any regulations relating to the manufacture of LRADs as they are manufactured in the United States of America (USA), however, the device is provided with a user manual.

(1)(c) Yes, by the Company known as Acoustic Deterrent Systems cc.

(2)(a) Yes.

(2)(b) 25 Public Order Policing Units are in possession of LRADs.

(2)(a)(b)(i) During the 2014/2015 financial year.

(2)(a)(b)(ii) Acoustic Deterrent Systems cc.

(2)(a)(b)(iii) LRAD Corporation, California, USA.

(3)(a) Yes.

(3)(b) Yes.

Reply:

1. The requested information is not readily available on the Investigation Case Docket Management System (ICDMS). As a result, a particular request must be made from the Division: Technology Management Services (TMS) to extract the information from the ICDMS via an ‘ad hoc’ request. The Division TMS has indicated, that seven working days are required to process requests of this nature. The information will be provided as soon as it is received by the Division: Detective Service.

2. This question can only be responded to when the particulars (case numbers) of the reported cases are received from Division: TMS.

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii) The South African Police Service (SAPS) has never procured any services nor made any payments to the Decolonisation Foundation.

(b)(i)(ii) For a reply by the other entities reporting to the Minister of Police.

(aa)(bb)(cc)(dd)(ee)(ff) Not applicable.

Reply:

46 Black Industrialists have been approved for funding. As with all dti incentive schemes the Black industrialist scheme is a cost sharing grant. Of the approved black industrialists, 13 have been paid on a cost sharing basis towards capital investment costs, post investment support and business development services to the tune of R212 Million. Of the paid projects 1443 jobs have been supported.

Reply:

a

Mr Alli was not paid as per his request.

Ms N Scheepers 38 601.42

Mr MF Baleni 36 287.75

Mr RC Mkwanazi 34 676.92

Mr TR Rikhotso 38 601.42

Total 148 167.51

b

The Board held 2 meetings. The first was an introduction meeting and the second was a Board meeting

c

The Board met on the following dates:

17 March 2017

31 March 2017

d

The Board was planning on having as an induction workshop to get a full understanding of the mandate of PRASA, however this did not materialise due to the outcome of the court case.

Reply:

1. The term of the reinstated Board of PRASA will expire on the 31 July 2017
2. There was no break in service as the Minister appointed the interim Board which was fully functional
3. The full Board was reinstated to ensure that they carry out their fiduciary duties, however some members of the Board resigned subsequent to their reinstatement leaving the vacancies which the Minister is currently in a process to fill.

Reply:

The MCEP is one of the key programmes of IPAP to encourage manufacturers to upgrade their production facilities in a manner that sustains employment and maximises value addition in the short to medium term. The Agro Processing sector was the highest beneficiary of the programme, resulting in a number of economic benefits including higher quality products, improved customer responsiveness, greater productivity and improved profitability. Most retained jobs and indirect jobs from the support emanated from this sector. Given the importance of Agro processing to revitalise rural economies, its relative low barrier to entry for new entrants, the need to provide post drought Agri input market access, the dti has prioritised competitiveness enhancement support for this sector. Unlike the previous MCEP which only catered for expansions, the support will enable both new and existing firms to invest in better technology and expand their facilities in a manner that retains and creates new job. Agro Processing Support Scheme will be funded from the additional 2017 MTEF allocation for manufacturing incentives.

The MCEP comprised of two sub-programmes namely production incentive and the Industrial Loan facility managed by the dti and IDC. The industrial loan facility was re-launched in September 2016 and continues to support qualifying manufacturing companies.

Reply:

(1) The case docket is still under investigation and none of the stolen computers

have been recovered. Several persons have been questioned and premises were visited but the stolen computers could not be traced.

(2)(a) The investigation has not yet been completed and various enquiries are being persued to trace the stolen computers. The investigating officer is also following up on information relating to other possible suspects.

(2)(b) The case docket has been registered as: Midrand CAS 567/03/2017.

(2)(c)(d) The case docket has been allocated to the Gauteng Provincial Investigation Unit. The particulars of the investigating officer cannot be divulged to ensure that the investigation is conducted without fear or favour.

(3)(a)(b) Yes, a suspect was questioned and arrested. The case against the suspect has been remanded to 17 May 2017, for further investigation.

Reply:

A case docket, Mhluzi CAS 63/12/2016 (assault with the intention to commit grievous bodily harm), was registered and investigated, with regard to the alleged assault on the learner.

The learner died in a hospital in Middleburg, Mpumalanga, in March 2017. It is suspected that the death could be related to complications as a result of the alleged assault in December 2016.

An inquest case docket, Middelburg CAS 472/03/2017, was registered relating to the death of the learner. The autopsy report and a medical report are now being awaited.

Reply:

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE ANDS ADMINISTRATION (DPSA)

1. (b) No
2. (b) No (i) No (ii) No

(aa) Not applicable, (bb) Not applicable

NATIONAL SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT (NSG)

1. (a) National School of Government did not participate in the Dialogue with the President: Unpacking of the SONA 2017 on Radical Economic Transformation Implementation event hosted at the Oyster Box Hotel in Umhlanga, Durban, on 25 February 2017

(2) (a) National School of Government did not participate in the auction.

CENTRE FOR PUPLIC SERVICE INNOVATION (CPSI)

1. (b) No
2. (b) No (i) No (ii) No

(aa) Not applicable, (bb) Not applicable

END

Reply:

The information that is required is not readily available. Each case must be verified before the information can be submitted. An extension of three weeks, is hereby requested, in order for us to provide the correct information.

Reply:

The Black Industrialist Policy was approved by Cabinet to support black entrepreneurs in the manufacturing sector of the economy, who have the potential to grow, invest and create jobs. These entrepreneurs must have identified an opportunity, own industrial capacity and are providing long term strategic and operational leadership to their business. The scheme focuses on sectors we believe are the corner stones of the country’s economy now and in the future as identified in the IPAP.

The names of the approved black industrialists will be published along with all the beneficiaries of incentive programmes for 2016/17 following the annual audit by the Auditor-General.

Reply:

No.

Reply:

(a) No. The Department of Public Works

    (i) has not procured any services from the Decolonisation Fund.

   (ii) no payments were made to the organisation stated above

Thus, responses to (aa), (bb), (cc), (dd), and (ff) fall away.

(b) (i) None of the Public Entities reporting to the Department of Public Works has procured any services to the Decolonisation Foundation.

(ii) No payments were made to the Decolonisation Foundation.

Thus, responses to (aa) (bb) (cc) (dd) (ee) and (ff) fall away.

 

Reply:

(a) The Department of Science and Technology did not procure any services from or make any payments to –

(i) Bell Pottinger;

(ii) any other public relations firm.

(b) The entities reporting to the Minister of Science and Technology did not procure any services from or make any payments to –

(i) Bell Pottinger;

(ii) any other public relations firm.

(aa) not necessary

(bb) not applicable

(cc) not applicable

(dd) not applicable

(ee) not applicable

(ff) not applicable

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii)(b)(i)(ii)(c)(d)(i)(ii)

The OTO announced earlier this year that they will be launching an investigation with regards to the refund processes administered by SARS to better understand the challenges, risks and complexity associated with the process. The investigation is currently underway and SARS is committed to working with the OTO to give them the required insight into the process so that they will be able to satisfactorily give feedback to the public on their findings.

SARS would want the current investigation underway to first be concluded before additional responses to the topic at hand is made as this stage.

Reply:

1. (a) The matter came to the SACE’s attention via a newspaper article on 23 January 2017.

2. Yes, the SACE investigated the matter on 7 March 2017.

 (a) The outcome of the investigation was that there was sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations that the principal had indeed assaulted the now deceased learner.

(b) The SACE served the principal with the charges to appear before a disciplinary hearing on 21 April 2017. The hearing was postponed at the request of the principal as he was appearing in an internal disciplinary hearing of the Department of Education.

(c) The hearing against the educator will take place on 23 May 2017.

Reply:

(a) DRUG BUST OPERATIONS (DPCI) – APRIL 2016 TILL MARCH 2017

HEAD OFFICE/ PROVINCE	NO OF OPERATION
SANEB Head Office	18
Western Cape	52
Gauteng	145
KwaZulu Natal	166
Eastern Cape	91
North West	102
Free State	30
Mpumalanga	49
Limpopo	13
Northern Cape	57
TOTAL	723

(b) Division: Visible Policing is reporting on the drug operations conducted during daily activities and planned special operations. The table below consists of drug operations during the financial year 2016/2017.

DRUG OPERATIONS: FINANCIAL YEAR 2016/17
OPERATIONS	EC	FS	GP	KZN	LIM	MP	NW	NC	WC	Prov Total
Drug Operations	1290	403	1490	1498	1628	2195	169	201	6193	15067
Drug Operations (Section 252(A))	16	32	219	22	56	35	1	17	652	1050
Total	1306	435	1709	1520	1684	2230	170	218	6845	16117
DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITIES	EC	FS	GP	KZN	LIM	MP	NW	NC	WC	Prov Total
Drug Operations	1710	482	5895	4529	1320	2964	264	73	3655	20892
Drug Operations (Section 252(A))	8	23	2447	97	32	66	1	0	434	3108
Total	1718	505	8342	4626	1352	3030	265	73	4089	24000
Grand Total	3024	940	10051	6146	3036	5260	435	291	10934	40117

(b) Border Policing conducted 3750 intelligence driven operations focusing on all priority crimes including drugs for the 2016/2017 financial year.

National Intervention Unit conducted 138 intelligence driven operations focusing on all priority crimes including drugs for the 2016/2017 financial year.

Reply:

(a) The department has, and will continue to apply the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act, Act 107 of 1998, as amended, as well as its subordinate legislation and will continue to ensure that it uses, among other things, a risk-averse and cautious approach in its assessments.

(b) DEA cannot “halt applications” and its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) processes once an application is received in terms of the EIA Regulations. In other words, the processes prescribed in terms of the legislation would have to be followed to finalise the application. DEA is obliged to consider all factors, including the findings of the assessment/s conducted for the facility in order to make an informed decision on whether to grant or refuse the application. The Spitskop West Wind Energy Facility’s EIA has not been concluded yet and DEA is awaiting the submission of the environmental impact assessment report (EIAr) which contains comments received on the proposed project and the specialist studies which will indicate the impact and significance of the impacts on, inter alia, avifauna. I am advised that, DEA has on-going consultations with BirdlifeSA and others. Vulpro and BirdlifeSA also have the opportunity to register as interested and affected parties (I&APs) and participate and provide input in the EIA process. The Renewable Energy Development Zones (REDZ) have been Gazetted for comment. For any site-specific EIA application in the REDZ, an assessment will still be required in future to determine site-specific impacts. The EIA process has in this case, as has been mentioned, not been concluded yet and no decision has been made by DEA.

(c) It must be understood that the department is not required by law to “engage the local expertise of certain companies”, but rather its function is to ensure that the reports submitted by the experts commissioned by the Environmental Impact Assessment practitioner (EAP) meet legislated requirements.

---ooOoo---

Reply:

(1)(a) The individual was appointed as a Non Executive Director (NED) to the Transnet Board of Directors on 14 December 2014, on a three year term, subject to annual review. By virtue of his appointment as NED, the said Person serves as member and Chairperson of the Board’s Acquisition and Disposal’s Committee and member of the Remuneration, Social and Ethics Committee. He is also Chairperson of the Transnet Second Defined Benefit Fund, the Transport Pension Fund and the Transnet sub-Fund of the Transport Pension Fund.

(b) The terms and conditions of the appointment are governed by the Companies Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI). The Board appointment process, includes sourcing of CVs from the DPE database preceded by the issuing of an advertisement to obtain nominations. At the time, the vetting process included verification of qualifications, disclosure of interests and credit checks. Persons are found to be suitable by virtue of their qualifications, expertise, skills and expertise.

(c) At the time, the vetting process included verification of qualifications, disclosure of interests and credit checks. No conflict was identified. Following approval by Cabinet, appointment by myself, and acceptance by the individual, Transnet’s internal policy of disclosure of interest at each meeting will apply. Should there be any conflict disclosed at any time in the tenure, the Director would need to observe fully and comply with the disclosure and recusal requirements of Transnet’s policies. It is important to note that the disclosure policies of a SOC must be in line with the PFMA 1999 and the Companies Act, 2008.

2. I am not aware of the personal relations of the Director with the name provided by the Member of Parliament. Once they are appointed on the Board, the Companies policies and procedures must be adhered to.

(3)(a-c) As stated above if a conflict is identified or disclosed after appointment the Company is responsible to manage through its applicable policies. Hence, no investigation was done by my Department as there was no cause for one.

4. Should there be any Director who has a conflict and has not properly disclosed, it is the Company who must report to me on the matter. Based on the report, as Executive Authority, I will take a decision on the matter.

 

Mogokare Richard Seleke Lynne Brown, MP

Director-General Minister of Public Enterprises

Date: Date:

Reply:

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (NDA)

The position of (a) CEO was filled on 1 November 2016 with the appointment of Ms Thamo Mzobe. The position of (b) Chief Financial Officer became vacant after the resignation of the former CFO. Interviews were conducted for this position and it will be filled as soon as all relevant human resources has been completed. The position of (c) Chief Operating Officer was newly created in the NDA organizational structure that was approved by the NDA Board. Interviews were conducted for this position and it will be filled as soon as all relevant human resources has been completed.

SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL SECURITY AGENCY (SASSA)

The position of (a) Chief Executive Officer was filled on 1 November 2016 with the appointment of Mr Thokozani Magwaza. The position of (b) Chief Financial Officer was filled on 1 March 2016 with the appointment of Mr Tsakeriwa Chauke. The position of the (c) Chief Operating Officer is currently vacant and was advertised. The closing date for applications for this position was 8 March 2017. The post will be filled in the current financial year.

Reply:

1.Applications for cell phone data in terms of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, as amended, are based on an affidavit from the investigating officer motivating why cell phone data is needed in respect of the number(s) and period(s) stated in the affidavit.

The prosecutor also considers the affidavit before submitting it to the judicial officer, who is the final and independent arbiter on the application. The Magistrate considers the application based on the affidavit but may also request that further information be provided and order that information not relevant to the case should not be used for any purpose There are thus three safeguards, in addition to the processes which may follow as part of a criminal prosecution which permits the accused to challenge the admission of evidence.

2. Yes. I have been informed that judges and magistrates receive continuous training and that applications in terms of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act resorts under the Criminal Law and Procedure Curriculum of the South African Judicial Education Institute.

3. No specified period was included in the question. It should be noted that the National Prosecuting Authority does not specifically require prosecutors to record the number of applications for cell phone data, and whether or not these were successful.

Reply:

1. The Department does not have information available for (a) or (b).

The Department is currently conducting a survey to determine the number of beds available at public Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) colleges, the findings will be communicated once completed.

The Department will also investigate and report on the number of applications received at the start of the 2017 academic year.

(2) (a) No renovations are taking place or planned because Parliament has not appropriated any funds for this purpose. To alleviate the shortage of student housing at TVET colleges, the Department is working with the Department of Public Works to identify state buildings and land which could possibly be converted or developed for student housing. . The Department is also working with the National Treasury to investigate the possibility of using Public Private Partnerships (PPP) to provide student housing at colleges. PPP feasibility projects are being conducted for Motheo TVET College in the Free State and King Hintsa TVET College in the Eastern Cape.

(b) Construction projects utilising available funding are listed below:

(i) 248 beds at Umfolozi TVET College through an allocation from the National Skills Fund.

(ii) – (iv) Dependent on the outcome of the PPP feasibility projects being undertaken.

 

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 1388 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

Reply:

ALEXKOR SOC LIMITED

(a)	NIL
(b)	NIL
(c)	NIL
(d)	NIL
(e)	NIL
(f)	NIL

DENEL SOC LIMITED

(a)	NIL
(b)	NIL
(c)	NIL
(d)	NIL
(e)	NIL
(f)	NIL

SAFCOL SOC LIMITED

(a)	NIL
(b)	NIL
(c)	NIL
(d)	NIL
(e)	NIL
(f)	NIL

SA EXPRESS SOC LIMITED

(a)	NIL
(b)	NIL
(c)	NIL
(d)	NIL
(e)	NIL
(f)	NIL

TRANSNET SOC LIMITED

(a)	NIL
(b)	NIL
(c)	NIL
(d)	NIL
(e)	NIL
(f)	NIL ESKOM SOC LIMITED (a) NIL (b) NIL (c) NIL (d) NIL (e) NIL (f) NIL

Remarks: Reply: Approved / Not Approved

Mr. Mogokare Richard Seleke Ms. Lynne Brown, MP

Director-General Minister of Public Enterprises

Date: Date:

Reply:

The information requested by the Honourable Member is available in the audited financial statements found in the 2014-15 and 2015-16 annual reports. The information for 2016-17 is currently being audited as part of the annual reporting in accordance with section 65 (1) (a) of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999.

Reply:

Presidential Protection Service (PPS)

(1)(a)(i) A total of 17 persons were protected by the South African Police Service (SAPS) Presidential Protection Service (PPS), in the 2016/2017 financial year.

(1)(a)(ii) Since 1 April 2017, a total of 17 persons were protected.

(1)(b)(ii)&(iii) Not applicable.

(1)(b)(i)(iv)(v)&(vi) The breakdown is provided in the table below:

Current President of South Africa
1	President JG Zuma
Current Deputy President of South Africa
2	Deputy President MC Ramaphosa
Former Presidents of South Africa
3	Former President FW De Klerk
4	Former President TM Mbeki
5	Former President KP Motlanthe
Former Deputy Presidents of South Africa
6	Former Deputy President P Mlambo-Ngcuka
7	Former Deputy President BM Mbete
Current First Ladies of South Africa
8	Spouse of President JG Zuma, GA Khumalo (Ma-Khumalo)
9	Spouse of President JG Zuma, N Ntuli (MaNtuli)
10	Spouse of President JG Zuma, TS Madiba
11	Spouse of President JG Zuma, GB Ngema (MaNgema)
12	Spouse of Deputy President MC Ramaphosa, Ms Motsepe
Former First Ladies of South Africa
13	Spouse of Former President TM Mbeki, Mrs Z Mbeki
14	Spouse of Former President KP Motlanthe, Ms Mtshali
15	Spouse of Former President Mandela, Mrs G Machel
Other persons afforded this service
16	Director General from Presidency, CL Lubisi
17	African Union Chairperson, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma
Foreign Dignitaries
The total number of foreign dignitaries protected during the 2016/2017 financial year is 65, and the total number protected since 1 April 2017, until 10 May 2017, is seven.

Protection and Security Services (PSS)

(1)(a)(i) A total of 288 persons were protected by the South African Police Service (SAPS) Protection and Security Services (PSS), in the 2016/2017 financial year.

(1)(a)(ii) Since 1 April 2017, a total of 289 persons were protected.

(1)(b)(i) Not applicable;

(1)(b)(ii) 34;

(1)(b)(iii) 37;

(1)(b)(iv) Not applicable;

(1)(b)(v) 77; and

(1)(b)(vi) 141 (including Provincial VIPs).

(2)(a) The reasons for protection are based on the outcome of individual threat assessments.

(2)(b) The total cost of protection is part of the annual budget which is allocated to PPS and PSS.

Reply:

(a) Travel:

(i) (aa) N/A (bb) R233 070 and (cc) 746 100 (unaudited)

(ii) (aa) R411 601 (bb) R1 152 9850 and (cc) R1 117 209(unaudited)

(iii) (aa) N/A (bb) R36 120 and (cc) R96 630 (unaudited)

(b) Accommodation:

(i) (aa) N/A (bb) R210 959.63 and (cc) 236 148.06 (unaudited)

(ii) (aa) R86 140 (bb) R260 567 and (cc) R274 288 (unaudited)

(iii) (aa) N/A (bb) R56 509.12 and (cc) R121 521.91 (unaudited)

(c) Subsistence costs:

(i) (aa) N/A (bb) N/A and (cc) 76 165 (unaudited)

(ii) (aa) R24 206.88 (bb) R124 675.04 and (cc) R118 816.65 (unaudited)

(iii) (aa) N/A (bb) N/A and (cc) R57 821.93 (unaudited)

 

Approved/Not Approved

Mr MJ Zwane, MP

Minister of Mineral Resources

Date Submitted:-……………/………………/2017

Reply:

(a) For the period 1 April 2017 to 31 May 2017, the Department of Communications (DoC) surrendered R562 080 976.58 to the National Revenue Funding in revenue arising from levies on the annual turnover of the license holders.

For the financial year ending 31 March 2017, the DoC paid R1 168 576 812.74 to the National Revenue Fund in collections received from the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA), compared to R1 127 564 019.98 in 2015/16. According to ICASA, of the total amount collected and transferred to DoC in 2016/17, the figures included R795 million in funds arising from levies on the annual turnover of the licence holders cited in Chapter 3 of the Electronic Communication Act, Act 36 of 2005. Services provided for in terms of Chapter 3 of the Act include, Electronic Communication Services and Electronic Communication Network Services, (Universal Service Access Fund) and ALF (Annual License Fees).

(b) Information detailing the names of the licence holders cited under (a) have been withheld by ICASA owing to issues of confidentiality.

Reply:

1. Yes.

(a) The reviews emanated from directives from the Public Protector to review contracts above R10m for the Public Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) which immediately extended to other State Owned Entities including Transnet;

(b) The National Treasury is still waiting for the requested documentation from Transnet and the Department of Public Enterprises respectively, in order to conclude the review;

(c) Submission of requested documents from Transnet and the Department of Public Enterprises will determine the timelines for the review; and

(d) The completion of the review is dependent on receipt of the documentation from Transnet and Department of Public Enterprises.

2.The report will be submitted to Standing Committee of Public Accounts which will make it public.

Reply:

(1)(a)(b) Due to the secrecy provisions contained in Section 69 of the Tax Administration Act No. 28 of 2011, SARS is prohibited from disclosing any taxpayer information (Including whether or not a taxpayer is subject to an audit) to any person other than a SARS official.

The South African Revenue Service (SARS) makes no differentiation according to taxpayers’ political affiliation. SARS treats the tax affairs of all members of political parties in exactly the same manner as all other taxpayers in accordance with the compliance model. This model is premised on three components to encourage tax compliance: Education, Service and Enforcement.

(2)(a) The selection of taxpayers for audits is generated through an automated risk Engine and manual profiling which is designed based on principles such as:

• Random, empirical and statistical rule sets are deployed

• The comparison of declared information to third party information e.g. Banks, Employers, Insurance Companies, etc.;

• The verification of claims;

• Year on year comparisons on income, deductions and movements in the aforementioned to identify exceptions;

• The verification of incomplete and inconsistent submissions of tax returns.

• The compliance programme which informs profiling activity

(b) Any case triggered by the risk engine and above a stated threshold would be routed for an Audit. This might apply to one taxpayer for multiple years.

(3) (a)(b) SARS audits debit, credit and nil assessments. The risk is obviously higher with credit assessments and thus the percentage of credit assessments audited will be higher. This question must be viewed in light of the R30bn credit revised assessments SARS was able to prevent from flowing last year.

SARS cannot comment on taxpayer perception, however all audit alerts are based on a sound selection process which all taxpayers are subject to.

Reply:

1. South Africa National Parks (SANparks)

(a) Not applicable.

(b) (i) No

(ii) No request was received from the foundation.

(aa) Not applicable.

(bb) Not applicable.

(cc) Not applicable.

(dd) Not applicable.

(ee) Not applicable.

(ff) Not applicable.

2. iSimangaliso Wetland Park

(a) Not applicable.

(b) (i) No

(ii) No request was received from the foundation.

(aa) Not applicable.

(bb) Not applicable.

(cc) Not applicable.

(dd) Not applicable.

(ee) Not applicable.

(ff) Not applicable.

3. South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI)

(a) Not applicable.

(b) (i) No

(ii) No request was received from the foundation.

(aa) Not applicable.

(bb) Not applicable.

(cc) Not applicable.

(dd) Not applicable.

(ee) Not applicable.

(ff) Not applicable.

4. South African Weather Service (SAWS)

(a) Not applicable.

(b) (i) No.

(ii) No request was received from the foundation.

(aa) Not applicable.

(bb) Not applicable.

(cc) Not applicable.

(dd) Not applicable.

(ee) Not applicable.

(ff) Not applicable.

---ooOoo---

Reply:

 

All the Provincial Education Departments (PEDs) have been requested to furnish the DBE with information in this regard and only three PEDs, Limpopo, Western Cape and North West Education Departments, have responded so far. The DBE will provide the additional information from the other provinces once the information is received.

1. Western Cape

Year	Date(s) of industrial action	Number of employee participation	Number of days lost	Days lost per District
	North	South	East	Central	Cape Winelands	West Coast	Overberg	Eden & Central
2009	No industrial action
2010	10 Aug 18 Aug 19 Aug 20 Aug 23 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 26 Aug 27 Aug 30 Aug 31 Aug 01 Sep 02 Sep 03 Sep 06 Sep	23 787	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15
2011	No industrial action
2012	07 March	859	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2013	24 April	1 599	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2014	No industrial action
2015	No industrial action

2. Limpopo

Year	Date(s) of industrial action	Number of employee participation	Number of days lost	Days lost per District
	Capricon	Mopani & Tzaneen	Sekhukhune	Waterberg	Lebowa Kgomo	Vhembe & Tshipise-Sagole	Riba-Cross	Mogalakwena
2009	No industrial action
2010	10 Aug 18 Aug 19 Aug 20 Aug 23 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 26 Aug 27 Aug 30 Aug 31 Aug 01 Sep 02 Sep 03 Sep 06 Sep	Not provided	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15
2011	No industrial action
2012	07 March	Not provided	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2013	24 April	Not provided	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2014	25 March	Not provided	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2015	28 April	Not provided	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1

3. North West

Year	Date(s) of industrial action	Number of employee participation	Number of days lost	Days lost per District
	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated	Not indicated
2009	September (no day)	2 650	1
2010	10 Aug 18 Aug 19 Aug 20 Aug 23 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 26 Aug 27 Aug 30 Aug 31 Aug 01 Sep 02 Sep 03 Sep 06 Sep	66 712	15
2011	22 Aug	1 298	1
2012	07 March	100	1
2013	24 April	Not provided	1
2014	No industrial action
2015	30-31 July 7 Aug 7 Oct	Not provided	4

Reply:

1. (a)(i),(ii) and (b) The Department of Basic Education (DBE) has never applied to obtain a copy of the National Register for Sex Offenders.

2. In terms of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, Act 32 of 2007, only employers offering services which allow for access to children such as schools and crèches must, before employing a person, establish from the Registrar of the Sex Offenders Register whether or not the potential employee’s name is on the National Register for Sex Offenders. Based on this statement, the employer of educators employed at the school level is the Head of the Provincial Education Department and it is therefore the responsibility of the Head of the Provincial Education Department to do so.

 (a) and (b) are not applicable to the DBE based on the above response.

Reply:

1. No. I have been informed that the Magistrates Commission has not received any formal complaint against Magistrate HJ Venter.

2. No steps were considered necessary, as the prosecutor was not deemed to have breached any guidelines or legal prescripts. Applications for cell phone data in terms of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, as amended, are based on an affidavit from the investigating officer motivating why cell phone data is needed in respect of the number(s) and period(s) stated in the affidavit.

 

Reply:

The information has been requested from the nine (9) Provincial Education Departments and will be provided as soon as it is received.

Reply:

The OTO announced earlier this year that they will be launching an investigation with regards to the refund processes administered by SARS to better understand the challenges, risks and complexity associated with the process. The investigation is currently underway and SARS is committed to working with the OTO to give them the required insight into the process so that they will be able to satisfactorily give feedback to the public on their findings.

SARS would want the current investigation underway to first be concluded before additional responses to the topic at hand is made as this stage.

Reply:

The Department has forwarded the question to the nine Provincial Education Departments and is awaiting the response. The response will be forwarded as soon as the Department receives it.

Reply:

The details for questions (a) to (d) are attached in Annexure A.

The reasons for the Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education Authority (ETDP SETA) utilisation of consultants are as follows:

• Education and Training Quality Assurance (ETQA)

In terms of the Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO) delegations, the ETDP SETA is required to use the services of verifiers with specific subject knowledge. The volume of verifications that need to be conducted far exceeds the internal ETDP SETA’s capacity.

• Research Chairs

ETDP SETA utilises the services of universities and research specialists, as it is not a specialised research institution. The establishment of research chairs assists ETDP SETA to increase its research capacity and transfer research skills to its staff.

• Accounting Secondment

Difficulties were experienced to recruit permanent skills, as its lifespan was unknown due to the uncertainty of its extension. The cost of the secondments were more cost effective than employing the same number of staff.

 

COMPILER/CONTACT PERSONS:

EXT:

DIRECTOR – GENERAL

STATUS:

DATE:

QUESTION 1385 APPROVED/NOT APPROVED/AMENDED

Dr BE NZIMANDE, MP

MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING

STATUS:

DATE:

Reply:

The Board and management undertook a two-day strategy planning session and identified the following 5 key strategic pillars to transform SAA into a financially sustainable aviation group:

• Liquidity;
• Balance Sheet Restructuring;
• Revenue enhancement;
• Cost optimization; and
• Strategy direction

Furthermore, Seabury was appointed to assist the airline with the review of the LTTS, particularly to determine its appropriateness for SAA. The results of this review will form the basis for a five (5) year fully funded Business Plan. Once the 5 year business plan has been finalised, management will be in a position to determine whether or not it will need financial assistance from the shareholder, the quantum and the timing thereof.

Reply:

The information requested by the Honourable Member is available in the audited financial statements found in the 2014 and 2015 annual reports of the eight entities reporting to me. The audited financial statements for 2016 are currently being audited and the annual reports containing these will be tabled in Parliament around August in accordance with section 65 (1) (a) of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999.

Reply:

Universal Service and Access Fund (USAF) – Cabinet approved Appropriations from the National Revenue Fund (NRF)

Between 2005/06 and as at 31 May 2017, a total of R2.8 billion was transferred to the Universal Service and Access Fund (USAF). This was done through the budget vote of the Department of Communications between 2005/06 to 2014/15 and the budget vote of the Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services from 2015/16 to date.

These allocations are comprised of funding of R501 million for projects related to its universal service and access mandate, as well as R2.3 billion for the Broadcasting Digital Migration project to pay for subsidies for Set Top Boxes (STBs), antennae and installation costs to qualifying poor households. The table link below illustrates the funding allocated:

http://pmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/RNW1438USAF-170606.pdf

Source: ENE 2009 – ENE 2017

Reply:

NO	WHERE- Name of School, District and Province	WHEN	NO OF LEARNERS	DAYS LOST
2013
3	NO SCHOOLS DAMAGED
2014
4	Tsoe Primary School, John Taolo Gaetsewe, Northern Cape	5-Jun-14	316	1
5	Ditshipeng Primary School, John Taolo Gaetsewe, Northern Cape	5-Jun-14	428	1
6	Keatlholela Primary School, John Taolo Gaetsewe, Northern Cape	5-Jun-14	183	1
2015
7	Atamelang Primary School, Dr. Ruth S Mompati, North West	30-Sep-15	284	1
8	Mpolosa Senior Primary School, Lusikisiki, Eastern Cape	8-Jun-15	65	1
2016
9	Joe Slovo High School, Metro East, Western Cape	05-07 September 2016	1171	2
10	Orlando Secondary School, Johannesburg West, Gauteng	13-May-16	680	7
11	Magudwini High School, Ndwedwe, KwaZulu-Natal	18-Apr-16	321	22
12	Mokhari Secondary School, Waterberg, Naboomspruit Circuit, Limpopo	10 March to 05 April 2016	624	25
13	Mvaba Secondary School, Pinetown, KwaZulu-Natal	25-May-16	2000	10
14	Phakane High School, John Taolo Gaetsewe, Northern Cape	12-Apr-16	533	1
15	Avhatondwi Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	534	31
16	Frank Mukhaswakule Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	373	31
17	Khwara Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	442	31
18	Kurulen Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	247	31
19	Luambo High School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	133	31
20	Lupedze Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	256	31
21	Maligana Wilson Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	696	31
22	Mariadze Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	480	31
23	Mashaa Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	182	31
24	Mashau Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	403	31
25	Masia Senior Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	92	31
26	Matshindevhe Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	275	31
27	Mavhina Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	318	31
28	Mphagane Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	421	31
29	Munwai Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	335	31
30	Nwaridi Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	456	31
31	Radzambo Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	184	31
32	Ramauba Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	326	31
33	Tshinavhe Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	391	31
34	Tshipakoni Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	395	31
35	Tshirunzanani Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	264	31
36	Tshivhade Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	394	31
37	Vhafamadi Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	867	31
38	Vhudzani Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	310	31
39	Thomas Ntshavheni Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	414	31
40	Muvimbi Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	435	31
41	Masakona Senior Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	449	31
42	Tshinange Secondary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	625	31
43	Mawela Primary School, Vhembe, Limpopo	May-16	384	31
2017
44	Kwanang Primary School, Bohlabela District, Mpumalanga	January 2017 to 28 March 2017	587	40
45	Bakutswe High School, Bohlabela, Mpumalanga	January 2017 to 28 March 2017	575	40
46	Lamulelani High School, Bohlabela, Mpumalanga	January 2017 to 28 March 2017	215	40
47	Rindzani Junior Secondary School, Bohlabela, Mpumalanga	January 2017 to 28 March 2017	572	40
48	Hillview Primary School, KwaZulu-Natal	8-May-17	500	1

Reply:

(a)(i)(ii)(b)(i)(ii)(c)(d)(i)(ii)

The OTO announced earlier this year that they will be launching an investigation with regards to the refund processes administered by SARS to better understand the challenges, risks and complexity associated with the process. The investigation is currently underway and SARS is committed to working with the OTO to give them the required insight into the process so that they will be able to satisfactorily give feedback to the public on their findings.

SARS would want the current investigation underway to first be concluded before additional responses to the topic at hand is made as this stage.

Reply:

 

1. The current CFO at Umalusi was appointed on 1 May 2017. The position remained unfilled from 1 March 2016, 14 months.

2. The applicant did apply for the first round of interviews. The applicant was appointed at Umalusi as the Senior Manager: Finance and Supply Chain Management (SCM) as from 1 April 2016. The applicant was not found to be an unsuitable candidate. In fact, the applicant was the best candidate in the first round of interviews. However, she could not be appointed because of the Umalusi Recruitment and Selection Policy. The policy states that “internal applicants must have served at least (1) one year before applying for another internal position or vacancy”. The panel did not want to deviate from the policy to ensure a fair and transparent recruitment process.

3. (a) The Senior Manager: Finance and SCM was appointed on level 13 notch 8 of the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) Senior Management Service (SMS) Salary scales. The annual amount as at 1 April 2016 was R997 476. The appointment was made at that level to equal the employee’s previous remuneration level as the employee was not being remunerated on DPSA levels with her previous employer.

(b) In terms of Umalusi policy “If an employee is required to act in a higher-grade position for an unbroken period of one (1) calendar month and/or 30 days, or longer, the employee qualifies to be remunerated at a sum equal to the entry level remuneration for that higher grade”. The Acting Chief Financial Officer was remunerated at salary level 14 notch 1 at R1 068 564 for the duration of the acting period.

(c) The Chief Financial Officer was appointed in May 2017 at salary level 14 notch 1, currently being remunerated at R1 068 564.

4. (a) Panel for CFO interview – 27 April 2016

Panel member name	Designation
Dr MS Rakometsi	CEO – Umalusi
Prof J Volmink	Chairperson – Umalusi Council
Mr M Albertyn	CFO – South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA)
Ms L Rossouw	Chairperson –Umalusi Audit and Risk Committee (ARC) / CFO – Department of Justice

(b) Panel for CFO interview – 24 March 2017

Panel member name	Designation
Dr MS Rakometsi	CEO – Umalusi
Ms L Rossouw	Chairperson of Umalusi ARC / CFO – Department of Justice
Mr NT Johnstone	Umalusi Council member / Member of Umalusi ARC
Ms N Madilonga	CFO – Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO) / Acting CEO
Mr T Mothusi	CFO – Council on Higher Education (CHE)

5. The new CFO was appointed at Umalusi as the Senior Manager: Finance and SCM from 1 April 2016. This was the first appointment of the employee at Umalusi.

Reply:

1. (a) and (b)

Yes, I am advised that there was correspondence between the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and employees of the company whose name was furnished, as is required by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (EIA), 2014. There has been, for example, comments on reports that have been submitted and formal letters such as an acknowledgement of the application and reports, as well as acceptance of the scoping report. DEA also had a pre-application meeting with the company whose name was furnished prior to submission of the application, which is customary practice.

It should be noted further that a certain person whose name was also furnished requested access to the same information, on behalf of AVDS Environmental Consultants, in terms of section 18(1) of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No. 2 of 2000) (PAIA), on 17 November 2016. He requested access to information relating to the environmental authorisation application for the proposed Spitskop West Wind Energy Facility, within the Blue Crane Route Local Municipality in the Eastern Cape Province. DEA granted access to the information on 12 December 2016. On 02 March 2017, a certain person whose name was also furnished submitted an appeal in terms of section 74 (1) of PAIA, on the basis that all the information to which access had been granted was not provided by DEA due to an oversight. The Ministers Appeal Decision upheld the appeal, and further access was granted to the following additional information, which was within the scope of the requested information:

• The letter to the Department from the company whose name was furnished dated 04 October 2016;
• The letter from, the company whose name was furnished titled “Pubic Participation Process” dated 06 October 2016;
• An email correspondence from the company whose name was furnished to the Department dated 11 and 06 October 2016 respectively;
• An email correspondence from the Department on 26 October 2016; and
• The letter to the Department from the company whose name was furnished dated 17 November 2016.

2. Anybody who would like to participate in an EIA process can formally register as an interested and/or affected party. This will enable the party to receive documentation, reports, notifications, etc. during the process. Once registered, the details of the party will be included in a register that will be used to communicate with interested and/or affected parties. This register and the comments and responses report forms part of the EIA documentation to be submitted to the competent authority. This means that all registered parties’ names will be included in reports and correspondence thereto. DEA’s responses and decisions sent to the environmental assessment practitioner (EAP) responsible for the EIA process is public documents and form part of the reports.

(a) (i) Yes, the Scoping Report submitted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process refers to “AVDS Environmental Consultants”. The name is included in the list of landowners notified during the scoping process and AVDS Environmental Consultants registered as a stakeholder and provided comments. The environmental impact assessment practitioner’s (EAP’s) response to the comments included “AVDS Environmental Consultants”. This is all set-out in Volume 3 of the Scoping Report dated October 2016. It is a legal requirement to include, in these reports, the names of registered interested and affected parties and their comments, as well as the EAP’s response thereto. DEA received the draft Environmental Impact Assessment report (EIAr) but has not reviewed the report due to the lapsing of the application. It therefore cannot be confirmed if the report also refers to “AVDS Environmental Consultants”.

(ii) Yes, the Scoping Report submitted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process refers to “the person whose name has also been furnished”. The name is included in the list of landowners notified during the scoping process, and “the person whose name has also been furnished” registered as a stakeholder and provided comments. The environmental impact assessment practitioner’s (EAP) response to the comments included “the person whose name has also been furnished”. This is included in Volume 3 of the Scoping Report dated October 2016.

As indicated above, it is a legal requirement to include, in the reports, the names of registered interested and affected parties and their comments, as well as the EAP’s response thereto. DEA received the draft Environmental Impact Assessment report (EIAr) but has not reviewed the report due to the lapsing of the application. The Department therefore cannot confirm if the report also refers to “the person whose name has also been furnished”. It should also be noted that the scoping report refers to “the person whose name has also been furnished” – AVDS Consulting.

(iii) Yes, the Scoping Report submitted as part of the EIA process refer to “the clients”. The names are included in the documentation, table of registered interested and affected parties, and comments received from AVDS as contained in Volume 3 of the Scoping Report dated October 2016. DEA received the draft Environmental Impact Assessment report (EIAr) but has not reviewed the report due to the lapsing of the application. It therefore cannot be confirmed if this report also refers to the clients.

(b) (i) No, there were no correspondence that excluded the environmental impact assessment practitioner’ (EAP). As indicated in the response to (1) above, it is a legal requirement that the competent authority respond to the EAP as required by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014; for example, by means of sending comments on reports submitted and formal letters such as acknowledgement of the application and reports, and acceptance of the scoping report.

(ii) Yes, the environmental impact assessment practitioner (EAP) is responsible to inform and correspond with registered interested and affected parties and include these in the reports.

3. All documentation regarding the proposed Spitskop West Wind Energy Facility that is in the public domain can be provided upon receipt of the request. Access to other information, records and documents will have to follow the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (Act No. 2 of 2000) (PAIA) process.

---ooOoo---

Reply:

1. (a) and (b)

The suspension of the Glenvista High School principal was as a result of the alleged financial mismanagement of the school funds. The principal was found guilty and sanctioned to three (3) months suspension without pay and subsequently returned to work after completing the three (3) months suspension. The allegation levelled against him was financial mismanagement.

2. (a) The allegation levelled against him was financial management.

(b) (i) Yes, an investigation was undertaken by KPMG.

(ii) Forensic Investigation processes were followed and was concluded within 60 days.

3. (a) The principal of the school and the Department were the only parties involved,

(b) and (c) The Department’s total cost was R 320 000.00 and the principal’s costs are unknown.

Reply:

The information has been requested from the nine (9) Provincial Education Departments and will be provided as soon as it is received.

Reply:

All previous NEEDU reports have been presented to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education in accordance with their programme. The 2014 NEEDU Report will be dealt with in a similar manner and be presented to the Portfolio Committee in line with the Committee’s programme. Its findings mirror findings in the 2012 and 2013 NEEDU national reports. The Department has therefore already been engaging with strategies necessary for systemic change and to ensure that NEEDU recommendations lead to notable impact in the system. For this reason, the Minister will not single out the 2014 NEEDU report for reporting to Parliament.

Reply:

There are no additional procedures and processes that have been put in place following the remarks made in the judgments of the British American Tobacco Company and Agliotti cases.

The existing processes as prescribed in section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act No. 51 of 1977 provide sufficient safeguards, as per the reply to question 1373.

(i) Applications for cell phone data in terms of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, as amended, are based on an affidavit from the investigating officer motivating why cell phone data is needed in respect of the number(s) and period(s) stated in the affidavit. The prosecutor also considers the affidavit before submitting it to the judicial officer, who is the final and independent arbiter on the application. There are thus three safeguards, in addition to the processes which may follow as part of a criminal prosecution which permits the accused to challenge the admission of evidence.

(ii) Not applicable

Reply:

(a) A consolidated, uniform approach to e-government is being developed by the Department of Telecommunication and Postal Services (DTPS). It would be prudent to address the question based on an understanding that the following qualities form the basis for e-government services:

• Focusing on efficiency gains in service delivery processes;
• Making government services more accessible to communities; and
• Improving inter-departmental interaction to ensure a streamlined service to the community.

The following projects will serve, inter alia, to demonstrate that e-government services are tangible and form an integral part of almost each and every corporate system that is in use in the South African Police Service (SAPS).

The Network Upgrade Project is a multi-year, multi-million rand project to modernise the network infrastructure at all SAPS offices, focusing on police stations as the priority.

The modernised network results in faster computing time, thereby reducing the time the community members are required to spend in a Community Service Centre (CSC), while information is being captured on corporate systems.

The modernised network enables modernisation of systems such as the Investigation Case Docket Management System (ICDMS) and the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS).

With higher capacities, the systems can be enhanced to do more, work faster and to exchange and/or verify information, even between government departments, for example the verification of citizen data between SAPS and the Department of Home Affairs. This is an e-government service that benefits citizens indirectly.

Corporate Systems are being developed, enhanced and maintained, by the State Information Technology Agency (SITA), on a daily basis. These systems all support the SAPS in day-to-day operations, ranging from crime administration systems, crime intelligence systems and corporate support systems. All these systems aim to support the qualities as mentioned above.

Below is a list of e-government services being rendered, but not having been specified as e-government services. The list is not an exhaustive list, but provides examples of e-government services which are integral to the day-to-day operations of the Division: Technology Management Services (TMS).

• The ICDMS administrative and investigative modules will ultimately lead to a paperless process where the case docket will be sent between departments in electronic format. This e-government service will lead to faster processing times, which should contribute to quicker resolution of cases.

• The SAPS webpage (www.saps.gov.za) currently has an e-government service where a citizen can enquire online about the status of their application for a Clearance Certificate. This is automated and the processing time has improved, as SAPS members do not spend their time answering enquiries, but rather spend it on executing the processes related to the Clearance Certificates.
• The e-Vetting system that is being utilised by SAPS internally, shortened the processing time to issue security clearances to SAPS members by Crime Intelligence, as everything is done online and not via a 10-page document.

• The Enhanced Firearm Registration System (EFRS) also promotes e-government services between SAPS and manufacturers and dealers of firearms. This ensures that the integrity of firearm information is reliable, as information is exchanged electronically.

• The implementation of the Central Supplier Database (CSD) reduces corruption as it ensures that when orders are issued to suppliers, ghost or shell companies are not used fraudulently as the requirements to be registered on the CSD are stringent. This enables faster payment to suppliers subsequent to goods and services having been rendered and minimises long payment cycles from government.

• Inter-departmental integrations are being managed through the Integrated Justice System (IJS) Board, where information exchange (between departments) is promoted using the Service Integration Business Architecture (SiBUS). This is an inter-departmental service which should eliminate duplication and therefore make processes more efficient in all relevant departments.

Most projects undertaken aim to address the qualities stated above. It is therefore not possible to isolate a cost factor associated purely with e-government services. SAPS corporate systems are being updated and enhanced on a daily basis, based on user requirements, as well as inter-departmental interfacing requirements. These services are rendered through the Service Level Agreements (SLA’s) between SAPS and SITA. The value of the Managed Applications SLA with SITA for 2016/2017, was R366 million. This includes all SAPS corporate systems, maintenance and support, as well as licensing costs for third-party software being utilised by SAPS.

(b) The budgeted cost for the Managed Applications SLA with SITA for 2017/2018 is R417 000 000, subject to final agreement between SAPS and SITA.